"'Everything has been screwed up. My last hope is to sell my kidney or liver. So please call me if you're interested,' a message on a Korean website reads, along with a phone number. Messages like this appear often on forums for patients with liver or kidney failure. Experts say organ trafficking is on the rise in South Korea even though it is illegal there.According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP) and Rep. Lee Nak-yeon of the country's main opposition Democratic Party, there were 357 reports of these organ trafficking messages online this year, up from 174 last year. However, the number of arrests for criminal organ trafficking has dropped radically, with only 1 this year, 3 in 2010, 9 in 2009, 18 in 2008 and 71 in 2007.
Under current law, no compensation for donors is allowed. Those who remove or transplant other people's organs illegally or introduce such practices can face prison. According to the CDCP, there are more than 20,000 patients on the waiting list for organs in Korea - but there have been only 2,500 donations." ~ Korea Times, Sep 16
http://www.bioedge.org/index.php/bioethics/bioethics_article/9755
Merci de ne PAS poster de messages concernant la vente d'un organe et comportant des coordonnées téléphoniques, e-mail, etc. La loi française interdit la vente d'organes.
Controversy over possible changes to US organ donation
"Criteria for organ donation in the US may change radically, if proposals by the United Network for Organ Sharing, which controls the allocation of organs, are implemented, the Washington Post has reported.
Post reporter Rob Stein said that the possible changes have stirred up a hornet’s nest among bioethicists. However, others say that the article is a beat-up. 'This article is a hysterical and inappropriate reaction to a very minor change in some standards. There is zero threat to the public well-being in this document,' says Dr Jeffrey Punch, of the University of Michigan’s Department of Surgery.
The controversy is swirling around UNOS’s guidelines for Donation after Cardiac Death. Most donors are 'brain dead', but increasingly transplant surgeons are removing organs from donors after their heart has ceased to beat. According to UNOS, in 2009, there were 920 DCD donors, an 8.5% increase over 2008. It says that the proposed changes 'can increase the number of organs procured from DCD donations and ultimately increase the number of transplants'.
Central to the dispute is how long surgeons should wait before declaring the person dead and removing organs. In recent years, the time has drifted down to two minutes. Now no time is specified. This horrifies some bioethicists.
'This is another step towards this idea of hovering, hovering, hovering to get more organs,' Michael A. Grodin, of Boston University, told the Post. 'The bottom line is that they want to do everything they can to increase organ donation.'
UNOS has responded that the waiting time has always been up to the discretion of individual hospitals – there never was a hard and fast two-minute wait time. However, some bioethicists have a very different view. 'By this document, every hospital in America can now develop its own definition of dead,' University of Washington bioethicist Gail Van Norman told the Post. 'And that is profoundly disturbing... 'We are, it seems, admitting that we are willing to take the chance of procuring organs from someone who is not dead yet.'
Other changes are also controversial. One is changing the criterion from cardiac death to 'circulatory death'. The idea is that an 'irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions' happens if the circulation of the blood is insufficient to sustain life, even if the heart is beating. But this does not convince everyone. 'Renaming the process is not successful and is potentially intentionally deceptive,' said Robert M. Veatch, a Georgetown University bioethicist on the UNOS ethics committee.
Another proposal which angers some bioethicists is that the hospital will be able to label the patient as a potential donor before the next-of-kin approves of the transplant. 'This change in policy creates the appearance that the patient is always being evaluated as a possible donor, which I think would make the public uneasy, and rightfully so,' said Leslie Whetstine, of Walsh University. However, UNOS describes this as 'a service to the grieving family'.
The UNOS board will meet in Atlanta in November to finalise changes to the guidelines." Washington Post, Sept 20
http://www.bioedge.org/index.php/bioethics/bioethics_article/9756
Post reporter Rob Stein said that the possible changes have stirred up a hornet’s nest among bioethicists. However, others say that the article is a beat-up. 'This article is a hysterical and inappropriate reaction to a very minor change in some standards. There is zero threat to the public well-being in this document,' says Dr Jeffrey Punch, of the University of Michigan’s Department of Surgery.
The controversy is swirling around UNOS’s guidelines for Donation after Cardiac Death. Most donors are 'brain dead', but increasingly transplant surgeons are removing organs from donors after their heart has ceased to beat. According to UNOS, in 2009, there were 920 DCD donors, an 8.5% increase over 2008. It says that the proposed changes 'can increase the number of organs procured from DCD donations and ultimately increase the number of transplants'.
Central to the dispute is how long surgeons should wait before declaring the person dead and removing organs. In recent years, the time has drifted down to two minutes. Now no time is specified. This horrifies some bioethicists.
'This is another step towards this idea of hovering, hovering, hovering to get more organs,' Michael A. Grodin, of Boston University, told the Post. 'The bottom line is that they want to do everything they can to increase organ donation.'
UNOS has responded that the waiting time has always been up to the discretion of individual hospitals – there never was a hard and fast two-minute wait time. However, some bioethicists have a very different view. 'By this document, every hospital in America can now develop its own definition of dead,' University of Washington bioethicist Gail Van Norman told the Post. 'And that is profoundly disturbing... 'We are, it seems, admitting that we are willing to take the chance of procuring organs from someone who is not dead yet.'
Other changes are also controversial. One is changing the criterion from cardiac death to 'circulatory death'. The idea is that an 'irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions' happens if the circulation of the blood is insufficient to sustain life, even if the heart is beating. But this does not convince everyone. 'Renaming the process is not successful and is potentially intentionally deceptive,' said Robert M. Veatch, a Georgetown University bioethicist on the UNOS ethics committee.
Another proposal which angers some bioethicists is that the hospital will be able to label the patient as a potential donor before the next-of-kin approves of the transplant. 'This change in policy creates the appearance that the patient is always being evaluated as a possible donor, which I think would make the public uneasy, and rightfully so,' said Leslie Whetstine, of Walsh University. However, UNOS describes this as 'a service to the grieving family'.
The UNOS board will meet in Atlanta in November to finalise changes to the guidelines." Washington Post, Sept 20
http://www.bioedge.org/index.php/bioethics/bioethics_article/9756
Pushing too hard on donation under cardiac death! Will organ donations dip in the US?
"Rob Stein, of the Washington Post, is one of the most experienced science reporters in the US. So it was a bit unsettling to read his 'exclusive' on possible changes to the criteria for organ donation. The group responsible for allocating organs in the US, the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS), wants to increase the supply of organs. One avenue is increasing the number of 'donations after cardiac death' which currently constitute about 6% of donated organs. (...)One suggestion, Stein wrote, is dropping the guideline of waiting between two and five minutes after cessation of heartbeat before removing organs. This frightens many people. Some of the scores of comments beneath his article are instructive:
'These ghouls must be stopped.'
'If the proposed changes occur, I will change my driver's license to reflect that I am not willing to donate under those circumstances.'
'This will really make me reconsider changing my status as an organ donor. Don't do this!!'
UNOS appears to have failed badly in communicating with the public. My understanding has always been that surgeons must wait at least two minutes. But a UNOS spokesman clarified after the publication of Stein's article that 'UNOS has always left the determination of these wait times up to the judgment of individual hospitals'. In other words, nearly everyone has been mistaken in thinking that the two-minute wait is mandatory. If organ donations dip after Stein's article, UNOS has only itself to blame.
But I admit that I am no expert - what do you think?"
BioEdge, Michael Cook, 09/24/2011
'These ghouls must be stopped.'
'If the proposed changes occur, I will change my driver's license to reflect that I am not willing to donate under those circumstances.'
'This will really make me reconsider changing my status as an organ donor. Don't do this!!'
UNOS appears to have failed badly in communicating with the public. My understanding has always been that surgeons must wait at least two minutes. But a UNOS spokesman clarified after the publication of Stein's article that 'UNOS has always left the determination of these wait times up to the judgment of individual hospitals'. In other words, nearly everyone has been mistaken in thinking that the two-minute wait is mandatory. If organ donations dip after Stein's article, UNOS has only itself to blame.
But I admit that I am no expert - what do you think?"
BioEdge, Michael Cook, 09/24/2011
"La Nouvelle Renaissance Innovation et créativité"
Messieurs Edgar Morin, Philosophe, Jean-Louis Servan-Schreiber, Essayiste, Alex Türk, Président de la CNIL, contribuent au livre électronique "La Nouvelle Renaissance Innovation et créativité" qui vient de sortir et qui inclut notamment les contributions suivantes qui permettent de bien comprendre l'impact des technologies internet :
- Economie numérique et Internet du futur
- Les télécoms au coeur des enjeux économiques et sociétaux
- Renaissance numérique et Open Source
- Tribune Libre Science et Nouvelle Renaissance
- Le DSI du futur
- Les logiciels libres : le cout de la gratuité
- Personnalité numérique et immortalité
- Vers une instruction civico-numérique
- Intelligence collective et renaissance de l'entreprise
Le bénéfice de cette opération est reversé à Mécénat Chirurgie Cardiaque Enfants du monde : le livre électronique est vendu 10 euros, 1000 ouvrages vendus permettant de sauver la vie d'un enfant.
==> Pour télécharger le livre électronique, cliquer ICI
Plus d'informations sur www.lanouvellerenaissance.
Cordialement,
L'équipe Innovativity
"Print your own organs"
(Audio version) If you need a new heart or lung, you’re in trouble. People are apparently reluctant to give up their inner workings to save others. But could you simply print a new heart? Andy Ridgway finds out.
"It's 10am at the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona and one of the surgeons is doing his rounds. He’s stopped at the bed of a patient who for months has been fighting for breath whenever she walks anywhere. Things have got so bad recently that she can barely make it from her bedroom to the living room. A chest scan reveals that she’s got a serious condition called pulmonary hypertension. The blood vessels in her lungs have thickened, so the oxygen she breathes in struggles to get into her bloodstream.
But this is 2019, and a new technique has just come into mainstream use that could help her out. Just an hour after diagnosis, she’s in an operating theatre having stem cells injected into the airways of her lungs. The procedure is completed in minutes. Over the coming days, things start to look much better for the patient. She’s now walking the length of the ward without getting breathless and her doctors say she’ll make a full recovery.
This is the dream of Professor Paolo Macchiarini, who works at the hospital. He came to prominence last year when he performed the first organ transplant using a patient’s own stem cells. That patient was Claudia Castillo, whose windpipe was damaged by TB. Her stem cells were used to grow a new piece of windpipe to replace the damaged section, without risk of rejection.
Macchiarini has high hopes for stem cells – cells with the power to turn into many of the specialist cells in the body, such as muscle and nerves. In fact, he’s already tried injecting them into mice lungs to treat hypertension – and it worked. But his ideas don’t end there. The body is actually littered with stem cells and Macchiarini says that if you could find something to trigger them into action – a magic bullet – they could repair the organs, eliminating the need for a transplant in many cases. Crucially, Macchiarini says he thinks he knows what that magic bullet is.
And Macchiarini isn’t alone in his hope of finding new ways to restore organs. Professor Anthony Atala, one of the world’s leading tissue regeneration experts, is looking at the solution from an entirely different perspective. He thinks the humble ink jet printer could hold the answer.
Right now, in 2009, the outlook wouldn’t be too rosy for our hypothetical patient. Drugs would suppress her symptoms to an extent. But not much. And instead of a simple injection, she’d be on the organ transplant list, waiting for a new pair of lungs. The chances are, she’d probably be waiting a long time. In fact, she may die there. In the UK there are many successful transplants each year – there’s no doubting that. But about 400 people on UK waiting lists simply run out of time.
Dr David White, a British-born scientist who now works in Canada, has pretty strong views on the situation. 'Transplantation is a complete failure,' he says. 'And the reason it’s a failure is that there aren’t enough organs to transplant.'
Baboon heart
One obvious solution to this lack of organs for transplant is to use body parts from animals. It may sound unsavoury, but the idea of xenotransplantation has already been tried on more than one occasion.
Back in 1984, a five-pound infant known only as Baby Fae had a baboon’s heart placed in her chest at the University Medical Center in California. She died 20 days after the transplant when her body launched a massive immune response.
Despite early setbacks like this, there’s still interest in organs taken from animals. A World Health Organisation meeting in China last November resulted in the so-called Changsha Communique – a document that will eventually guide the practice of xenotransplantation globally. And in the US, pig hearts have already been transplanted into baboons, paving the way for trials in humans. Much of the research is focused on genetically altering the pigs so their organs don’t provoke the kind of immune response Baby Fae experienced.
Rather than transplanting a complete animal organ, White’s area of interest is in transplanting parts of organs. He is looking at taking insulin-producing cells from pigs and transfering them into diabetics. The cells, called Islets of Langerhans are taken from the pig’s pancreas and places inside the patient’s abdomen, to help regulate their blood sugar level.
White, who works at the Robarts Research Institute in Canada, has a few clever tricks up his sleeve to make sure the patient’s immune system doesn’t go into overdrive and launch an attack on the pig cells. The islets are mixed with another type of cell called Sertoli cells that are found in pig testes. These act as guardians for the insulin producers, preventing an attack by the patient’s immune system. White is hoping to get permission from the US authorities to start clinical trials of the procedure in the next 12 months.
But won’t people feel squeamish about having cells from pigs inside them? 'I’ve been asked this question many times,' says White. 'I think someone who is not diabetic may well raise the yuk factor. But we have been using pig insulin to treat diabetes since 1923 and no-one is squeamish about that.'
Think before you print
But instead of taking organs from animals, why don’t we just make our own from scratch? That’s where Professor Atala’s ink jet printers come in. He uses a printer that works with living cells rather than ink.
The printer head has been modified so it moves vertically producing a 3D structure, one layer at a time.
'We can print a complete solid organ, such as a heart, but in miniature,' says Atala, director of Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine in North Carolina. 'The idea of 3D printing has been around for a long time in things like CAD [computer aided design]. All we’re doing is applying the technology that’s already out there to biological systems.'
Once they have been printed using mouse or donated human cells, these miniature hearts spookily start beating. The biggest challenge is keeping all the cells supplied with nutrients. And it’s this problem that’s causing most of the head scratching at Wake Forest.
Atala’s extensive tissue-growing know-how will be tapped into during a military project that has some mind-blowing aims. Last year the US Department of Defense announced the creation of the Armed Forces Institute of Regenerative Medicine (AFIRM). Aimed at helping troops who’ve been injured in battle, it will look at how to regrow skin, muscles and tendons – even ears, fingers, arms and legs (see ‘Grow your own,’ above).
One of Atala’s colleagues, Dr James Yoo, will carry out research for AFIRM. 'One approach we are looking at is utilising the body’s ability to regenerate,' says Yoo. 'There are stem cells in almost every organ and we are trying to find a way to activate them to regenerate tissue. It could be used for both internal and external organs [fingers and toes, for instance]. The key is to find the right cues.' [cue = trigger factor]
That’s where Macchiarini’s magic bullet comes in. But what is this mystical substance that could kick-start the body’s stem cells into action so they repair damaged organs? Well, anyone with an interest in professional cycling will have heard the name – erythropoietin, or EPO. For cyclists it has the handy (but outlawed) effect of boosting the number of oxygen-carrying red blood cells in the blood. Atala believes the hormone could also be a signal to stem cells to take action.
If he’s right, then an EPO injection – along with, perhaps, an implant of a few extra stem cells for good measure – could be enough to repair a faulty heart, lung or liver. The EPO would know where to act by spotting inflammation.
No miracle cures
Professor Andrew George at Imperial College London researches techniques to reduce a patient’s immune response to transplants – both conventional ones and those involving xenotransplantation. He says it’s important to manage people’s expectations of the alternatives to conventional transplants – whether they are stem cells, printed organs or tissues from animals. 'When I started work on monoclonal antibodies in the mid-’80s, they were going to cure everything – heart disease, acne, cancer, flatulence – everything,' he says. 'Anyone with a white coat and a syringe could get a grant to work on them. When I came back from the States in 1992, you could not get money to work on them. Now they have important applications, such as herceptin. But they are only used in certain areas.'
George thinks that stem cells could follow the same pattern. At the moment, they’re the cure-all miracle of tomorrow. In five years’ time maybe they’ll be the latest medical white elephant. And only five years after that will we have a realistic appraisal of what they can do.
'We went through a period when xenotransplantation would do everything and we’d have organs coming out of our ears,' he says. 'Then there was a period when we said it would do nothing. Now we’re at the stage of saying, ‘Where can we apply it?’ It’s about managing hype, which is something we’re not very good at.'"
Andy Ridgway is news and features editor of Focus
"It's 10am at the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona and one of the surgeons is doing his rounds. He’s stopped at the bed of a patient who for months has been fighting for breath whenever she walks anywhere. Things have got so bad recently that she can barely make it from her bedroom to the living room. A chest scan reveals that she’s got a serious condition called pulmonary hypertension. The blood vessels in her lungs have thickened, so the oxygen she breathes in struggles to get into her bloodstream.
But this is 2019, and a new technique has just come into mainstream use that could help her out. Just an hour after diagnosis, she’s in an operating theatre having stem cells injected into the airways of her lungs. The procedure is completed in minutes. Over the coming days, things start to look much better for the patient. She’s now walking the length of the ward without getting breathless and her doctors say she’ll make a full recovery.
This is the dream of Professor Paolo Macchiarini, who works at the hospital. He came to prominence last year when he performed the first organ transplant using a patient’s own stem cells. That patient was Claudia Castillo, whose windpipe was damaged by TB. Her stem cells were used to grow a new piece of windpipe to replace the damaged section, without risk of rejection.
Macchiarini has high hopes for stem cells – cells with the power to turn into many of the specialist cells in the body, such as muscle and nerves. In fact, he’s already tried injecting them into mice lungs to treat hypertension – and it worked. But his ideas don’t end there. The body is actually littered with stem cells and Macchiarini says that if you could find something to trigger them into action – a magic bullet – they could repair the organs, eliminating the need for a transplant in many cases. Crucially, Macchiarini says he thinks he knows what that magic bullet is.
And Macchiarini isn’t alone in his hope of finding new ways to restore organs. Professor Anthony Atala, one of the world’s leading tissue regeneration experts, is looking at the solution from an entirely different perspective. He thinks the humble ink jet printer could hold the answer.
Right now, in 2009, the outlook wouldn’t be too rosy for our hypothetical patient. Drugs would suppress her symptoms to an extent. But not much. And instead of a simple injection, she’d be on the organ transplant list, waiting for a new pair of lungs. The chances are, she’d probably be waiting a long time. In fact, she may die there. In the UK there are many successful transplants each year – there’s no doubting that. But about 400 people on UK waiting lists simply run out of time.
Dr David White, a British-born scientist who now works in Canada, has pretty strong views on the situation. 'Transplantation is a complete failure,' he says. 'And the reason it’s a failure is that there aren’t enough organs to transplant.'
Baboon heart
One obvious solution to this lack of organs for transplant is to use body parts from animals. It may sound unsavoury, but the idea of xenotransplantation has already been tried on more than one occasion.
Back in 1984, a five-pound infant known only as Baby Fae had a baboon’s heart placed in her chest at the University Medical Center in California. She died 20 days after the transplant when her body launched a massive immune response.
Despite early setbacks like this, there’s still interest in organs taken from animals. A World Health Organisation meeting in China last November resulted in the so-called Changsha Communique – a document that will eventually guide the practice of xenotransplantation globally. And in the US, pig hearts have already been transplanted into baboons, paving the way for trials in humans. Much of the research is focused on genetically altering the pigs so their organs don’t provoke the kind of immune response Baby Fae experienced.
Rather than transplanting a complete animal organ, White’s area of interest is in transplanting parts of organs. He is looking at taking insulin-producing cells from pigs and transfering them into diabetics. The cells, called Islets of Langerhans are taken from the pig’s pancreas and places inside the patient’s abdomen, to help regulate their blood sugar level.
White, who works at the Robarts Research Institute in Canada, has a few clever tricks up his sleeve to make sure the patient’s immune system doesn’t go into overdrive and launch an attack on the pig cells. The islets are mixed with another type of cell called Sertoli cells that are found in pig testes. These act as guardians for the insulin producers, preventing an attack by the patient’s immune system. White is hoping to get permission from the US authorities to start clinical trials of the procedure in the next 12 months.
But won’t people feel squeamish about having cells from pigs inside them? 'I’ve been asked this question many times,' says White. 'I think someone who is not diabetic may well raise the yuk factor. But we have been using pig insulin to treat diabetes since 1923 and no-one is squeamish about that.'
Think before you print
But instead of taking organs from animals, why don’t we just make our own from scratch? That’s where Professor Atala’s ink jet printers come in. He uses a printer that works with living cells rather than ink.
The printer head has been modified so it moves vertically producing a 3D structure, one layer at a time.
'We can print a complete solid organ, such as a heart, but in miniature,' says Atala, director of Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine in North Carolina. 'The idea of 3D printing has been around for a long time in things like CAD [computer aided design]. All we’re doing is applying the technology that’s already out there to biological systems.'
Once they have been printed using mouse or donated human cells, these miniature hearts spookily start beating. The biggest challenge is keeping all the cells supplied with nutrients. And it’s this problem that’s causing most of the head scratching at Wake Forest.
Atala’s extensive tissue-growing know-how will be tapped into during a military project that has some mind-blowing aims. Last year the US Department of Defense announced the creation of the Armed Forces Institute of Regenerative Medicine (AFIRM). Aimed at helping troops who’ve been injured in battle, it will look at how to regrow skin, muscles and tendons – even ears, fingers, arms and legs (see ‘Grow your own,’ above).
One of Atala’s colleagues, Dr James Yoo, will carry out research for AFIRM. 'One approach we are looking at is utilising the body’s ability to regenerate,' says Yoo. 'There are stem cells in almost every organ and we are trying to find a way to activate them to regenerate tissue. It could be used for both internal and external organs [fingers and toes, for instance]. The key is to find the right cues.' [cue = trigger factor]
That’s where Macchiarini’s magic bullet comes in. But what is this mystical substance that could kick-start the body’s stem cells into action so they repair damaged organs? Well, anyone with an interest in professional cycling will have heard the name – erythropoietin, or EPO. For cyclists it has the handy (but outlawed) effect of boosting the number of oxygen-carrying red blood cells in the blood. Atala believes the hormone could also be a signal to stem cells to take action.
If he’s right, then an EPO injection – along with, perhaps, an implant of a few extra stem cells for good measure – could be enough to repair a faulty heart, lung or liver. The EPO would know where to act by spotting inflammation.
No miracle cures
Professor Andrew George at Imperial College London researches techniques to reduce a patient’s immune response to transplants – both conventional ones and those involving xenotransplantation. He says it’s important to manage people’s expectations of the alternatives to conventional transplants – whether they are stem cells, printed organs or tissues from animals. 'When I started work on monoclonal antibodies in the mid-’80s, they were going to cure everything – heart disease, acne, cancer, flatulence – everything,' he says. 'Anyone with a white coat and a syringe could get a grant to work on them. When I came back from the States in 1992, you could not get money to work on them. Now they have important applications, such as herceptin. But they are only used in certain areas.'
George thinks that stem cells could follow the same pattern. At the moment, they’re the cure-all miracle of tomorrow. In five years’ time maybe they’ll be the latest medical white elephant. And only five years after that will we have a realistic appraisal of what they can do.
'We went through a period when xenotransplantation would do everything and we’d have organs coming out of our ears,' he says. 'Then there was a period when we said it would do nothing. Now we’re at the stage of saying, ‘Where can we apply it?’ It’s about managing hype, which is something we’re not very good at.'"
Andy Ridgway is news and features editor of Focus
Charlotte Valandrey : Elle raconte son incroyable histoire dans un livre
Six ans après la publication de son premier livre, L'Amour dans le sang, dans lequel elle parlait de sa séropositivité et de la greffe du coeur qu'elle a dû subir, Charlotte Valandrey publie un nouvel ouvrage. Baptisé De coeur inconnu, il raconte la relation de l'actrice avec un homme qui pourrait être le mari de celle dont elle porte le coeur.
"Connue pour son rôle dans Les Cordier, juge et flic, Charlotte Valandray est aujourd'hui écrivain. Une voie qu'elle a pris après que la télévision comme le théâtre l'ont mise au placard, suite à l'annonce de sa séropositivité. En 2005, l'actrice publiait son premier livre, L'Amour dans le sang, dans lequel elle parlait de sa maladie et révélait avoir subi une greffe du coeur. Six ans plus tard, elle dévoile un deuxième ouvrage, dans lequel elle raconte l'incroyable romance qu'elle a vécu avec un homme qui pourrait être le mari de celle dont le coeur lui a été greffé.
Un mois après cette greffe, Charlotte Valandrey recevait un courrier. 'Je connais le cœur qui bat en vous, je l’aimais' lisait-elle dans cette lettre, bientôt suivie d'autres messages. En 2007, un homme l'a abordée à la sortie du théâtre où elle jouait la pièce La mémoire de l'eau. 'Il s'appelle Yann, se dit divorcé. Nous tombons amoureux. Tout se passe très bien, jusqu'au jour où, un an plus tard, me trouvant seule chez lui, j'ouvre son secrétaire, poussée par une intuition. Là, je tombe sur un dossier, avec un certificat de décès de l'hôpital "X" et un article de journal mentionnant l'accident de la place de la Nation' raconte-t-elle dans un entretien accordé à L'Express. 'Yann a lu une interview, il a fait le rapprochement avec moi. Lorsque j'ai découvert la vérité, j'ai pris une énorme claque. Cette histoire n'est certainement pas pour rien dans le troisième infarctus qui m'est tombé dessus peu après et dont je me suis heureusement très bien remise' confie Charlotte.
Jamais elle ne saura si le coeur de cette femme est réellement celui qui lui a été greffé, la loi imposant le secret total. Mais 'même si je ne porte pas le coeur de cette femme, ce n'est pas grave, parce que j'ai décidé, moi, que tous les indices convergeaient. Ça m'arrange : c'était quelqu'un de bien ; médecin dans l'humanitaire, elle vivait une très belle histoire d'amour' explique Charlotte Valandrey.
C'est tout cela que raconte l'actrice dans son second livre, qui nous l'espérons, rencontrera le même succès que le premier."
http://www.news-de-stars.com/charlotte-valandrey/charlotte-valandrey-elle-raconte-son-incroyable-histoire-dans-un-livre_art54639.html
"Connue pour son rôle dans Les Cordier, juge et flic, Charlotte Valandray est aujourd'hui écrivain. Une voie qu'elle a pris après que la télévision comme le théâtre l'ont mise au placard, suite à l'annonce de sa séropositivité. En 2005, l'actrice publiait son premier livre, L'Amour dans le sang, dans lequel elle parlait de sa maladie et révélait avoir subi une greffe du coeur. Six ans plus tard, elle dévoile un deuxième ouvrage, dans lequel elle raconte l'incroyable romance qu'elle a vécu avec un homme qui pourrait être le mari de celle dont le coeur lui a été greffé.
Un mois après cette greffe, Charlotte Valandrey recevait un courrier. 'Je connais le cœur qui bat en vous, je l’aimais' lisait-elle dans cette lettre, bientôt suivie d'autres messages. En 2007, un homme l'a abordée à la sortie du théâtre où elle jouait la pièce La mémoire de l'eau. 'Il s'appelle Yann, se dit divorcé. Nous tombons amoureux. Tout se passe très bien, jusqu'au jour où, un an plus tard, me trouvant seule chez lui, j'ouvre son secrétaire, poussée par une intuition. Là, je tombe sur un dossier, avec un certificat de décès de l'hôpital "X" et un article de journal mentionnant l'accident de la place de la Nation' raconte-t-elle dans un entretien accordé à L'Express. 'Yann a lu une interview, il a fait le rapprochement avec moi. Lorsque j'ai découvert la vérité, j'ai pris une énorme claque. Cette histoire n'est certainement pas pour rien dans le troisième infarctus qui m'est tombé dessus peu après et dont je me suis heureusement très bien remise' confie Charlotte.
Jamais elle ne saura si le coeur de cette femme est réellement celui qui lui a été greffé, la loi imposant le secret total. Mais 'même si je ne porte pas le coeur de cette femme, ce n'est pas grave, parce que j'ai décidé, moi, que tous les indices convergeaient. Ça m'arrange : c'était quelqu'un de bien ; médecin dans l'humanitaire, elle vivait une très belle histoire d'amour' explique Charlotte Valandrey.
C'est tout cela que raconte l'actrice dans son second livre, qui nous l'espérons, rencontrera le même succès que le premier."
http://www.news-de-stars.com/charlotte-valandrey/charlotte-valandrey-elle-raconte-son-incroyable-histoire-dans-un-livre_art54639.html
Les grandes entreprises signent la charte du coeur
Avant, qu'un employé dans une grande entreprise décède d'un arrêt cardiaque, c'était considéré comme une fatalité. Sauver la vie de cet infortuné employé n'était pas une priorité ... Les choses changent ... L'Oréal, la SNCF, la Fnac, Total, TF1 (voir la liste) : les grandes entreprises s'engagent et signent les unes après les autres la charte du coeur. Concrètement, cela veut dire que des défibrilateurs sont installés dans chaque bâtiment (au siège et ailleurs - un défibrillateur par bâtiment) pour toute entreprise signataire de la charte ... Dès la survenue de l'arrêt cardiaque : appeler les secours, masser, envoyer quelqu'un chercher un défibrilateur : une appli pour iPhone faite pour Apple par une petite entreprise française vous permet de localiser le défibrilateur le plus proche ...
Vous aussi, vous pouvez apprendre à sauver une vie, et mobiliser votre entreprise, ou encore apprendre à vos enfants les gestes qui sauvent ... C'est par ici :
==> http://www.charteducoeur.fr
Il faut savoir qu'une situation d'arrêt cardiaque non récupéré peut faire de chacun de nous un donneur d'organes (reins et foie), depuis 2007. C'est inscrit dans la loi ...
Le Fonds stratégique d'investissement (FSI) aide Cellectis à devenir champion des cellules souches
La société française de biotechnologies a annoncé l'achat du suédois Cellartis, leader européen des cellules souches. La transaction valorise le groupe scandinave 33,8 millions d'euros, dont 16,4 millions seront payés en numéraire et le reste en titres Cellectis.
"Cellectis change de dimension. Le spécialiste français de l'ingénierie du génome a annoncé hier soir l'acquisition du suédois Cellartis, leader européen des cellules souches. La transaction valorise le groupe scandinave 33,8 millions d'euros, dont 16,4 millions seront payés en numéraire et le reste en titres Cellectis. Un gros morceau pour la société tricolore de biotechnologies, qui reste déficitaire avec un résultat net négatif de 8 millions d'euros l'an dernier.
Pour mener à bien son projet de croissance externe, Cellectis a obtenu deux soutiens de poids. Le Fonds stratégique d'investissement (FSI), détenu par l'Etat et la Caisse des Dépôts, et un investisseur privé, Pierre Bastid, vont apporter chacun 25 millions d'euros à Cellectis. Chacun obtiendra environ 17 % du capital.
'Cellectis possède plusieurs atouts importants : sa technologie est maîtrisée et elle s'applique à des domaines très différents, qui vont du végétal aux cellules souches en passant par les kits de recherche. Cette variété permet de diversifier les risques et d'augmenter les chances de succès. La société a en outre signé une cinquantaine d'accords avec des industriels de renom', explique Thomas Devedjian, membre du comité exécutif du FSI.
L'arrivée de Pierre Bastid au capital et au conseil d'administration de Cellectis est par ailleurs emblématique de la réorientation entreprise par la biotech. Forte de 130 personnes aujourd'hui (auxquelles s'ajouteront les 62 salariés de Cellartis), la société veut changer d'échelle et se transformer pour devenir un groupe industriel de taille mondiale. Or Pierre Bastid est un bon connaisseur de l'industrie : il a présidé Converteam, une ancienne filiale d'Alstom spécialisée dans les systèmes de conversion d'énergie, qu'il a revendue au printemps à General Electric à un très bon prix.
'Dans le domaine des cellules souches, tout l'intérêt de Cellartis est qu'elle sait industrialiser un savoir-faire et réalise déjà un chiffre d'affaires, de l'ordre de 3 millions d'euros. En fusionnant notre filiale Ectycell avec Cellartis, nous allons pouvoir fabriquer nos produits nous-mêmes et visons clairement le leadership mondial', détaille André Choulika, le PDG de Cellectis.
En termes de recherche, Cellartis fera en outre gagner trois ou quatre ans à son nouveau propriétaire. L'opération doit être source de synergies, puisque la promotion des produits Cellartis sera assurée par la force de vente de Cellectis.
Objet de multiples travaux de recherche, les cellules souches doivent permettre de restaurer les tissus et organes endommagés (peau, os, cerveau, sang, etc.). Dix ans après sa création, Cellartis possède la plus grande banque de cellules souches au monde. Ce spin-off de l'université de Göteborg a par ailleurs conclu en 2008 un important accord de partenariat avec le spécialiste danois du diabète Novo Nordisk, qui pourrait lui rapporter jusqu'à 100 millions d'euros de revenus. La recherche porte sur des cellules productrices d'insuline, un marché évalué à 33 milliards de dollars. De son côté, Ectycell travaille avec l'Institut français du sang sur des globules rouges de substitution. Là encore, les besoins non satisfaits sont très importants : dans le monde, la part des patients n'ayant pas accès à une transfusion est estimée à 80 %.
Au-delà de l'acquisition de Cellartis, la levée de fonds servira à assurer la croissance de Cellectis. Elle permettra par exemple de financer le développement de 4 nouveaux traits de plantes en agriculture biologique, ou les projets de recherche de thérapies ciblées du cancer et de médicaments orphelins pour les maladies sanguines."
LAURENCE BOLLACK, Les Echos
Enfin un peu de courage politique ...
LA SECURITE SOCIALE EN DANGER
Economie et social | Ajouté le 12.09.2011 à 20H45
"Depuis des années beaucoup annoncent une catastrophe ! La voici arrivée. 30 millions de déficits des comptes sociaux ! Les explications sont les mêmes depuis 10 à 15 ans mais rien n’est fait !
Il y a trop d’hôpitaux en France, ils pèsent pour 50 % des dépenses d’assurance maladie.
Les Français exigent d’avoir leur hôpital en bas de chez eux. Accoucher à 30 ou 40 km ? Impossible, inacceptable ! Se faire opérer à 50 km de chez soi ? Trop loin !
Alors qu’il n’y a plus assez de médecins hospitaliers, que le matériel médical et chirurgical est extrêmement cher et qu’il n’est pas possible d’en installer partout des outils modernes qui seraient d’ailleurs sous employés, mais par « électoralisme », poussé par les maires, demandé par les Français, les politiques tardent à se regrouper les hôpitaux… L’argent est dilapidé !!
Les Français consomment trop de médicaments, entre 3 et 10 fois plus que les autres Européens. mais surtout, poussés par les laboratoires, avec la complicité des agences, ils consomment les médicaments les plus chers.
Le Premier Président de la Cour des comptes, Didier Migaud, semble découvrir cette anomalie. Je lui suggère donc de lire « Avertissement aux malades, aux médecins et aux élus », livre que j’ai écrit en 2003 avec Philippe Even.
Je le souligne, une nouvelle fois, la France, les laboratoires, les médecins, les pouvoirs publics sont tous fautifs. Il est de bon ton de prendre le dernier médicament, le plus cher, alors que le même, mis sur le marché un ou 10 ans auparavant est tout aussi efficace et coûte 10 fois moins cher.
Il y a trop de consultations à l’hôpital, chacun y va pour un oui pour un non quitte à encombrer les couloirs des services d'urgence alors qu’une simple consultation d’un médecin généraliste aurait suffit.
Quant aux A.M.E., aides médicales d'Eétat, distribuées aux étrangers qui ne viennent en France que pour se faire soigner, elles deviennent excessivement coûteuses !
Et si nous parlions de la fraude à la carte vitale ? Des dizaines voire des centaines de millions d’Euros sont en jeu…
Il existe depuis trop longtemps une politique de gribouille, un laxisme, un aveuglement. Voici le résultat, 30 milliards de déficit !! Et dans peu de temps la Sécurité Sociale qui va disparaître…"
Pr Bernard DEBRE
Ancien Ministre
Député de Paris
Il y a trop d’hôpitaux en France, ils pèsent pour 50 % des dépenses d’assurance maladie.
Les Français exigent d’avoir leur hôpital en bas de chez eux. Accoucher à 30 ou 40 km ? Impossible, inacceptable ! Se faire opérer à 50 km de chez soi ? Trop loin !
Alors qu’il n’y a plus assez de médecins hospitaliers, que le matériel médical et chirurgical est extrêmement cher et qu’il n’est pas possible d’en installer partout des outils modernes qui seraient d’ailleurs sous employés, mais par « électoralisme », poussé par les maires, demandé par les Français, les politiques tardent à se regrouper les hôpitaux… L’argent est dilapidé !!
Les Français consomment trop de médicaments, entre 3 et 10 fois plus que les autres Européens. mais surtout, poussés par les laboratoires, avec la complicité des agences, ils consomment les médicaments les plus chers.
Le Premier Président de la Cour des comptes, Didier Migaud, semble découvrir cette anomalie. Je lui suggère donc de lire « Avertissement aux malades, aux médecins et aux élus », livre que j’ai écrit en 2003 avec Philippe Even.
Je le souligne, une nouvelle fois, la France, les laboratoires, les médecins, les pouvoirs publics sont tous fautifs. Il est de bon ton de prendre le dernier médicament, le plus cher, alors que le même, mis sur le marché un ou 10 ans auparavant est tout aussi efficace et coûte 10 fois moins cher.
Il y a trop de consultations à l’hôpital, chacun y va pour un oui pour un non quitte à encombrer les couloirs des services d'urgence alors qu’une simple consultation d’un médecin généraliste aurait suffit.
Quant aux A.M.E., aides médicales d'Eétat, distribuées aux étrangers qui ne viennent en France que pour se faire soigner, elles deviennent excessivement coûteuses !
Et si nous parlions de la fraude à la carte vitale ? Des dizaines voire des centaines de millions d’Euros sont en jeu…
Il existe depuis trop longtemps une politique de gribouille, un laxisme, un aveuglement. Voici le résultat, 30 milliards de déficit !! Et dans peu de temps la Sécurité Sociale qui va disparaître…"
Pr Bernard DEBRE
Ancien Ministre
Député de Paris
http://www.bernarddebre.fr/actualites/la_securite_sociale_en_danger#.TnH8hhwvnNR.facebook
Cellectis annonce l'acquisition prochaine du leader européen des cellules souches
| |||
|
| ||
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)