VistaGen Therapeutics, Inc. (VSTA) Able to Use Non-Embryonic Stem Cells for Rescuing Promising Drug Candidates

Few advances in the history of human health have raised as much hope as the development and application of pluripotent stem cell technology. It's an enthusiasm based on the fact that pluripotent stem cells, unlike adult cells, have the remarkable ability, under the right conditions, to be transformed into all sorts of different cells, which can then be used for more efficient research, testing, and ultimately the replacement of damaged tissues and cells for the treatment of heart failure, Parkinson's disease, cancer, and other life threatening conditions. A key point is that there are different kinds of stem cells, though with similar capabilities.

Embryonic Stem Cells (ES Cells) are pluripotent stem cells derived from excess embryos, eggs that have been fertilized in vitro (IVF) and donated for research purposes with the informed consent of the donors. These embryos did not develop inside the body, and consist of only about 100 cells, long before organs, tissues, or nerves have developed. ES Cells have well-documented potential to differentiate into any of the over 200 cell types found in the human body (that is, they are pluripotent).

Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (iPS Cells) are derived from adult cells, typically human skin or fat cells, that have been genetically reprogrammed to behave like ES Cells. This is done by forcing the cells to express the genes necessary for maintaining the differentiating ability found in ES Cells. Although ES Cells and iPS Cells are similar in many respects, including the important ability to differentiate into other types of cells, scientists are still determining if there some ways in which they are not alike.

VistaGen Therapeutics is a biotechnology company primarily focused on using advanced stem cell technologies for rescuing previously researched drugs. These are drugs that may have had millions of dollars in research behind them, with proven efficacy, but were blocked because of possible toxicity issues, usually heart or liver toxicity. In some cases this is due simply to the inability of existing assays to provide adequate toxicity data. Such drugs offer immense potential if they can be brought back to life through today's state-of-the-art testing methods being made possible by VistaGen's proprietary pluripotent stem cell technologies.

For example, VistaGen's human heart cell bioassay system, CardioSafe 3D, can provide clearly predictive heart toxicity data on drug candidates before they are ever tested in humans. CardioSafe 3D is based upon a combination of proprietary and exclusively licensed stem cell technologies, including technologies developed over the last 20 years by renowned Canadian scientist, Dr. Gordon Keller, and Dr. Ralph Snodgrass, VistaGen's founder, President and Chief Scientific Officer. It's a superior approach designed to eliminate the possibility of toxicity surprises such as occurred with Merck's Vioxx or GlaxoSmithKline's Avandia.

VistaGen's additional advantage is that the Company has developed the ability to use iPS Cells as well as ES Cells for their applications, and in fact has not had to use excess embryos from IVF clinics for over 7 years.

5 Reasons the Government Should Be Run Like a Business

One of the worst-run businesses in the United States is also the largest business in the nation. The federal government is in financial disarray. It spends more than it makes and its investments are not based on sound financial principles.

The question often asked is should the U.S. government be run like a business? Should it abide by the same rules that all businesses in the United States must follow?

The answer for most Americans is a resounding "yes," but how would that make our current government different than it is today?

First, a big step for the government would be to spend less than it makes. The federal budget has a number of "unfunded liabilities," including Social Security, federal pensions, Medicare and Medicaid, which are preventing positive cash flow. Unfortunately, when the positive side of the income statement decreases as it has in the last four years, the expense side does not. And because many of those liabilities have cost of living adjustments, they are rising every year. Curbing those expenses or putting a cap on them would be a great step towards solvency.

Second, businesses do not have an unlimited checkbook, nor should the Federal Reserve. Right now, the government can print money at its discretion and as we have seen, it does more often than we care to remember. Printing money means there is more cash on hand to go around, which sounds good, but it dilutes the value of U.S. currency and therefore causes inflation. That means it will require more of that diluted money to purchase goods and services.

Third, the government should asses all of its employees according to their work flow, production, and output. And if any employees are not pulling their weight, they should be let go. But, we all know that will not happen. It is almost impossible to lose your job if you work for the government.That is not how a business is run.

Fourth, the benefit plans offered by the U.S. government are not balanced. Its health plan with all of its options is phenomenal, while its 401(k) plan (the Thrift Savings Plan or TSP) with its five investment options is awful. Having meaningful but fair, competitive, and economical employee benefits helps both the employee and the employer. It also could save us some tax dollars.

Finally, sometimes businesses need to realize that they are not productive or financially stable in one area or another. When that is the case, they should cease operations in that area. For example, the U.S. Post Office has been struggling for years, but nothing has been done about it. This is definitely one area in which our government could become more efficient. They could sell off that unit by making it a private entity. It would likely be more competitive and more efficient and not put such a burden on the federal budget.

As you probably already know, big businesses are not always easy to run, but you also know that if you are leading a large company, you must always watch your revenues and expenses and make good business decisions by looking into the future. If our government officials, both Democrats and Republicans, would begin to do that, we would have a better economy, a more productive nation, and be the global power we once were.

Hedging 4 Big Retirement Risks

Heading into retirement can raise a slew of scary questions. Will unexpected expenses throw off your retirement plan? Could a market crash decimate your carefully built nest egg? Most important, do you have enough money to last you through your golden years?

Retirement risk No. 1: Longevity

Back in 1935, when Social Security was first established, the average life expectancy was only about 61 years. That number has been rising ever since, to 78 currently, according to Stephen Horan, head of private wealth management for the CFA Institute and co-author of "The New Wealth Management." Moreover, once you've already made it to age 65, you're likely to live until 81 or 83 years old.

A healthy diet, exercise and a history of long-lived ancestors can boost your life expectancy still higher. So even if you think you're going to live until age 85, you need to plan for the possibility you'll make it to age 95 or 100, Horan says.

"Overwhelmingly, the biggest one is the risk of outliving your money," says Ken Fisher, chief executive officer of Fisher Investments. "Most people underestimate the amount of time they're going to live, and they invest as if they're going to die in 10 years."

Retirement risk No. 2: Inflation

Another key risk is inflation, the inevitable increase in the cost of goods and services, including housing, clothing, food, electronic devices and health care. Even with very low rates of inflation, say 3 percent a year, you would lose half of your purchasing power over two decades, Mervine says. "That's probably the biggest risk to investors' long-term ability to make ends meet," he says.

To guard against inflation, you can invest in inflation-protected securities or other investments that will gain value as overall prices climb. For instance, stocks in your portfolio aimed at growth rather than income will provide a hedge against inflation, says Michael Reese, Certified Financial Planner and founder of Centennial Wealth Advisory based in Traverse City, Mich.

Retirement risk No. 3: The market

When you hear the word risk, the danger that usually springs to mind is market risk. That's the scenario in which you've amassed a healthy portfolio of stocks and bonds only to see it plummet in value because of a market crash or other disruption to the global financial system.

The solution: Diversify your portfolio among a healthy mix of stocks, bonds, commodities and real estate, with no outsized holdings in one company's stock. On the stock side, a portfolio would be allocated among several asset classes, geographic regions and companies of various sizes. It should reflect a combination of value, growth and dividend-paying investments. On the fixed-income side, it would be invested mostly in government and investment-grade corporate bonds with varying terms and durations.

"Diversification is one of those free lunches," Mervine says. "The more diverse a portfolio, the better."

Retirement risk No. 4: Reinvestment

Don't overlook the possibility that your investments will mature at an inconvenient time. It's not unusual for a bond to be called earlier than you expect, at a time when interest rates are too low to replace that investment with a similarly profitable one, Mervine says.

The cure: a healthy variety of maturity dates. "You need to think about not having all your investments coming due at the same time," he says. "Every year you'll have something coming due that can be repositioned into the longer-term interest rates."