Dagupan church workers parishioners back Villegas

first_imgDagupan church workers, parishioners back Villegas amid sedition raps Read Next View comments Senate to probe Tolentino’s ‘novel legal theories’ on oral agreements Loot, who won over Corro by just seven points in the May 2016 elections, said furnishing the respondent a copy of the complaint was “an elementary procedure no lawyer would ever miss unless it was intentional.”MORE STORIESnewsinfoDagupan church workers, parishioners back Villegas amid sedition rapsnewsinfoLondon rated best city for studentsnewsinfoBar test panel chairs for 2019, 2020 vow ‘very reasonable examination’MORE STORIESnewsinfoDagupan church workers, parishioners back Villegas amid sedition rapsnewsinfoLondon rated best city for studentsnewsinfoBar test panel chairs for 2019, 2020 vow ‘very reasonable examination’“I can only guess that perhaps the protest was just to encourage his supporters to keep their hopes alive. But the protestant (Corro) actually does not want the ballot boxes to be opened because people might know that my lead over him is more than the official count,” Loot said in a text message to the Inquirer.Loot, a retired police general, was among the police officials who were named “drug protectors” by President Rodrigo Duterte in July last year.Loot denied the allegations. /atm/rgaADVERTISEMENT LATEST STORIES Augusto Corro says he will appeal the dismissal of his protest against Vicente Loot by the Bogo City Regional Court. (Photo from the Cebu Daily News).CEBU CITY – The Bogo City Regional Trial Court (RTC) dismissed the election protest filed by defeated mayoral candidate Augusto Corro against Mayor Vicente Loot of Daanbantayan town, north Cebu, because Corro failed to give Loot’s camp a copy of the complaint.In an order dated March 31, 2017, Judge Ricky Jones Macabaya of Bogo RTC Branch 61 said: “A perusal of the record shows that the protestee (Loot) was not furnished a copy of the petition. There is also no showing that a copy of the petition was served through other modes of service as tere is no written explanation accompanying the said petition.”ADVERTISEMENT Philippines ‘fires off’ diplomatic protest over Chinese vessels circling Pag-asa Island Duterte remark on Loot, Roxas not an accusation — Panelo PLAY LIST 02:48Duterte remark on Loot, Roxas not an accusation — Panelo01:47Jeepney driver busted for ‘trip-cutting’ in Manila01:45MMDA, local mayors spearhead clearing operations along Baclaran03:26PCSO to focus on improving transparency of gaming activities01:39Sotto open to discuss, listen to pros and cons of divorce bill06:02Senate to probe Tolentino’s ‘novel legal theories’ on oral agreements01:50Palace open to make Dengvaxia usable again as dengue cases spike01:49House seeks probe on ‘massive corruption’ in PCSO01:37PCSO estimates P250M in Lotto revenue loss due to suspension London rated best city for students Indian coffee magnate’s body found by river WBC suspends Whyte’s status as interim world heavyweight champion Palace open to make Dengvaxia usable again as dengue cases spike MOST READ Macabaya said said the failure to make proper service of the complaint will “cause the pleading or paper to be considered as not filed” under the 2010 Rules of Procedure in Election Contest Before the Courts involving Elective Municipal Officials.“Wherefore, premises considered, the instant petition is hereby dismissed for noncompliance (of the rules),” he said.FEATURED STORIESNEWSINFOBREAK: Suspension of Lotto operations lifted – PaneloNEWSINFODuterte to Cayetanos: ‘Kailan kaya matapos ang dynasty niyo?’NEWSINFOIndian family caught taking items from Bali hotel, sparking criticism onlineSought for comment, Corro said he would appeal the decision.“The dismissal, with due respect to the court, is baseless because no law or rule requires that the protestee (Loot) should be given a copy of the protest before filing it in court,” Corro said. “The protestee is notified of the protest upon the issuance by the court of summons to him, to which a copy of the protest is attached, as provided under the rules.” Don’t miss out on the latest news and information. Bar test panel chairs for 2019, 2020 vow ‘very reasonable examination’last_img read more

Researchers rein in slicehappy gene editor CRISPR

first_img“I think that this is a potential breakthrough,” says Jin-Soo Kim, a molecular biologist at Seoul National University who was not involved with the work. But the quest to perfect CRISPR doesn’t have a clear end. “No drugs are free of off-target effects,” he notes. With CRISPR-based therapies still far from human testing, no one knows just how precise is precise enough.CRISPR relies on a DNA-cutting enzyme called Cas9 attached to a short strand of RNA that guides it to specific point in the genome. When the RNA finds a complementary—or nearly complementary—sequence, Cas9 makes its slice. There are already several approaches to prevent unintended slicing. Shortening the length of the guide RNA makes it more sensitive to mismatched sequences, but it can also create entirely new off-target effects. Some labs have experimented with a version of Cas9 that cuts through a single DNA strand instead of two. That means two Cas9 enzymes bearing two different guide RNAs have to recognize their target sequences to cut both strands—a more demanding matching process. But doubling the number of RNA guides adds bulk, which could make it harder to deliver a CRISPR-based treatment into cells.In the new work, published online today in Nature, Joung and colleagues took a different approach. They modified the Cas9 enzyme itself to change the way it interacts with DNA. They first altered some of the “residues” on the enzyme’s surface that presumably help the guide RNA pair with its matching DNA strand. One set of modifications created a new variant of Cas9, called Cas9-HF1, that appears to be much more discriminating in its cuts. The researchers made seven different edits guided by seven different RNA strands, each known to produce off-target effects with Cas9. But Cas9-HF1 showed no detectable off-target effects in six of these cases—and just one errant slice in the seventh, they report. Joung adds that the apparent slice could actually be the result of a sequencing error.The results come on the heels of a similar feat, led by CRISPR pioneer Feng Zhang of Harvard University and the Broad Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts, published last month in Science. That team modified Cas9 to change how it interacts with a different part of a cell’s DNA. It, too, dramatically improved CRISPR’s specificity. But it’s hard to compare those results directly with the new paper because they used slightly different methods to measure off-target effects.Joung claims his group’s measurements are roughly 10-fold more sensitive than the one used in the Science paper. Both studies rely on methods that attach molecular tags to all points in the genome where a double-stranded break has occurred, before sequencing the short, flagged segments to count the cuts in various genes. Joung’s team claims to detect edits that occur in at least 0.1% of the genome. Zhang says the method used in his paper has been validated down 0.3%, and it may be even more sensitive.Does detecting just a couple of faulty cuts in a thousand matter? Absolutely, Joung says. “A lot of therapeutic strategies envision manipulating millions, tens of millions, even hundreds of millions of cells, potentially. So one in 1000 sounds pretty good, but that number can become quite large.” He argues that the field needs tests that root out these potentially harmful effects at frequencies of 0.01% or even lower.Others are less focused on increasingly sensitive tests. Because CRISPR will never fully be rid of off-target effects, the key question for a given therapy is not strictly how many unwanted cuts it makes, but whether it disrupts any essential genes, says Jiing-Kuan Yee, a molecular biologist at the research center City of Hope in Duarte, California. Each therapeutic application will require its own carefully selected Cas9 molecule—and modifications like those in the two recent papers might be combined.“Pretty soon, I think everybody’s going to start using these modified Cas9s,” he says. “The [off-target] problem will still be there, but it’s going to be much, much reduced.” Click to view the privacy policy. Required fields are indicated by an asterisk (*) 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 Sign up for our daily newsletter Get more great content like this delivered right to you! Countrycenter_img Email Keith Joung remembers the first time he took CRISPR for a spin. In late 2012, the pathologist at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston assembled the components of the new gene-editing technology and fiddled with the DNA of a zebrafish embryo. “It was so easy to do,” he says. “It was just stunning.”CRISPR—the highly efficient set of molecular scissors recently selected as Science’s Breakthrough of the Year—might be easy to use, but it’s not perfect. Joung and his colleagues soon found that these scissors could get too slice-happy, cutting DNA in unexpected and unwanted locations. In early experiments, the group observed that these off-target effects could occur at some DNA sites with nearly the same frequency as the desired edits. That’s a problem if CRISPR is to form the basis of human therapies, for example, repairing the defective genes that cause muscular dystrophy or hereditary liver disease. Researchers’ primary concern is that cutting into an unwanted gene could cause uncontrolled growth and cancer.Now, Joung and colleagues have found a way to make CRISPR more precise. In a new study, they modified its cutting enzyme to reduce off-target effects below detectable levels.last_img read more