Category Archives: Freedom

Meta Vaux Warrick Fuller's sculpture at Harriet Tubman Square in Boston (Photo by Erin Clark/The Boston Globe via Getty Images)

Black History Month will commence on Feb. 1 with National Freedom Day, a day of observance that commemorates the end of slavery in the United States.

The day marks the signing of a resolution between former President Abraham Lincoln and Congress that became the 13th Amendment, outlawing slavery. Lincoln signed the measure on Feb. 1, 1865, although it wasnt ratified by states until much later.

According to the Library of Congress, Richard Robert Wright, Sr., who was once enslaved, fought to have a day that celebrates freedom for all Americans. After gaining his own freedom, Wright became a businessman and activist in Philadelphia and urged people to celebrate that freedom on Feb. 1, in honor of when the the 13th Amendment was signed.

RELATED: Black History Month: The little-known backstory

President Harry Truman made National Freedom Day an official observance when he signed the bill in 1948 "to promote good feelings, harmony, and equal opportunity among all citizens and to remember that the United States is a nation dedicated to the ideal of freedom," according to the Library of Congress.

Before signing the 13th Amendment, Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation on Jan. 1, 1863. The proclamation declared "that all persons held as slaves" within the rebellious states "are, and henceforward shall be free." Rebellious states were those that succeeded from the U.S. during the Civil War.

Slavery did not immediately end when the Emancipation Proclamation was signed. It wasnt until June 19, 1865 when Maj. Gen. Gordon Granger and his Union troops arrived at Galveston, Texas that the last group of enslaved people in the country heard the war had ended and they were now free.

Granger delivered General Order No. 3, which said: "The people of Texas are informed that, in accordance with a proclamation from the Executive of the United States, all slaves are free. This involves an absolute equality of personal rights and rights of property between former masters and slaves, and the connection heretofore existing between them becomes that between employer and hired labor."

RELATED: Juneteenth now a permanent state holiday in Virginia

The next year, the now-freed slaves celebrated on the anniversary in Galveston. The celebration has since continued on the same day - known as Juneteenth - around the nation and the world.

Forty-six states and the District of Columbia recognize Juneteenth as a state holiday or day of recognition, like Flag Day. Countries like South Korea, Ghana, Israel, Taiwan, France, and the U.S. territory of Guam have held or now hold Juneteenth celebrations.

A resolution recognizing Juneteenth as a national holiday passed the Senate last year, but the accompanying resolution has not been approved in the House.

The Associated Press contributed to this report. This story was reported from Los Angeles.

Read this article:

Feb. 1 marks National Freedom Day, observing the end of slavery - FOX 2 Detroit

Getty Images

Tom Brady isnt the only former Patriot who is thriving in Tampa Bay. Rob Gronkowski is, too, and Gronk rubbed a little salt in the New England wound on Friday.

Via JoeBucsFan.com, Gronk said while appearing on SiriusXM NFL Radio that Patriots coach Bill Belichick and Buccaneers coach Bruce Arians have totally different approaches to the media, and to player behavior.

Coming here, its is a complete 180, for sure, totally different, Gronk said. I mean, I feel like the biggest difference is just having the freedom of being yourself in this organization.

To be fair, Gronk always seemed to have the freedom to be himself in New England unlike most players. If anything, Gronk has seemed more restrained and less visible this year, possibly because he doesnt have quite the same level of skills that he once possessed.

Regardless, its no surprise that things are different between New England and Tampa Bay. And, other than this year, New Englands approach has proven to be far more successful.

Read more here:

Rob Gronkowski likes the freedom of being yourself in Tampa - NBC Sports

Rising hit maker Jimmie Allen teams with Brad Paisley for his latest single, rolling the windows down for an open road, coming-of-age anthem titled Freedom Was a Highway.

Filled with teenage dreams and wind-in-your-face optimism, Allen co-wrote the track with fellow tunesmiths Ash Bowers and Matt Rogers. It features a cruising, modern country-rock sound and hard-driving rhythm plus a full-throttle guitar solo from Paisley and the all-star partners say they still remember feeling the tracks emotional heartbeat. When all they wanted to do was chase the horizon, and paradise was just a tank of gas away.

When I was writing this song with my co-writers, I imagined myself driving down my favorite roads in Delaware. This song takes me back to simpler moments such as an innocent, childhood crush on the next-door neighbor or feeling freedom in the wind as you drive with the windows down. Ive loved this song from the creation,says Jimmie Allenin an official statement. Im a huge admirer of Brad Paisley. I love what he brings to music and I had to have him bring that same magic to this song. Im humbled to have him join me on this song he brought the Freedom to the Highway.Im a fan of Jimmie, not only as a musician but also as a person, and I was honored when he asked me to join him on the song, Paisley adds. Its a magical combination it doesnt sound like a typical record for me at all and when I come in, I try my best not to ruin Jimmies song. I use my guitar to make a record sort of sound like Im on it, even before you hear me sing, and I love this guitar solo. Im really proud to be a part of Freedom Was a Highway and Im excited for people to hear it.

When the town was the whole world / And love was the girl next door / Soundtrack was a song in the dark / I miss those days when our dreams were there for chasin / But time was better wasted / We were summer young and livin for a Friday / And freedom was a highway, goes the chorus.

Freedom Was a Highway first appeared on Allens 2020 EP, Bettie James, and it will now be shipped to country radio for airplay starting February 1. Bettie James also included Allens This Is Us duet with Noah Cyrus, and the Delaware native broke out with back-to-back Number Ones, Best Shot and Make Me Want To.

Excerpt from:

Jimmie Allen and Brad Paisley Cruise on Freedom Was a Highway - Sounds Like Nashville

by Marcus K. Dowling 1/29/2021

Make music you love for the people that love you.

Country crooner Jimmie Allen counts this as the best piece of advice he received from his friend and dearly-departed country icon Charley Pride. One listen to Freedom Was A Highway Allens new superstar duet with Brad Paisley shows that this advice was well heard.

When the town was the whole world / And love was the girl next door / Soundtrack was a song in the dark / I miss those days when our dreams / Were there for chasin / But time was better wasted / We were summer young and livin for a Friday / And freedom was a highway / Freedom was a highway, Allen sings in a tone yearning for less complicated American days.

Allens big breakthrough could be one hit away.

To-date 2018s Best Shot, was a platinum-selling debut single. His 2019 hit Make Me Want To was a solid, gold-selling follow-up. As well, hes received nominations from CMT, the CMA Awards, and the Academy of Country Music Awards rewarding his work. Though 2020 was a relatively quiet year for Allen, both Freedom Was A Highway, as well as his recent social media tease of No Limits a track with rap-country hybrid artist and CMT Listen Up singer Blanco Brown shows that 2021 will be a busy year with great potential for continued career growth.

After a year wherein Allen performed alongside Pride at the CMA Awards in the legends last performance before his mournful passing, it appears hes ready to assume the torch passed to him and dive long and deep into universal pop-country appeal.

Read more from the original source:

Jimmie Allen Yearns For Better Days With Brad Paisley Duet "Freedom Was a Highway" - CMT.com

LONDON - Britain's government vowed Friday to stand by the people of its former colony, Hong Kong, against a Chinese crackdown as it prepared to launch a new visa scheme potentially benefiting millions.

Starting Sunday, holders of British National (Overseas) status a legacy of British rule over Hong Kong up to 1997 will be able to apply to live and work in Britain for up to five years, and eventually seek citizenship.

Before the change, BN(O) passport holders have had only limited rights to visit Britain for up to six months and not to work or settle.

Britain says it is acting in response to the National Security Law imposed by China last year, which has devastated Hong Kong's democracy movement and shredded freedoms meant to last 50 years under the 1997 handover accord.

"I am immensely proud that we have brought in this new route for Hong Kong BN(O)s to live, work and make their home in our country," Prime Minister Boris Johnson said in a statement.

"In doing so, we have honored our profound ties of history and friendship with the people of Hong Kong, and we have stood up for freedom and autonomy values both the U.K. and Hong Kong hold dear."

Any Hong Kong resident born before 1997 is eligible for BN(O) status. The new visa path opens up entry to the United Kingdom to an estimated 2.9 million adults in Hong Kong and another 2.3 million of their dependents.

In practice, London projects that up to 322,400 of Hong Kong's 7.5 million population will take up the visa over five years, benefiting the British economy by up to $4 billion.

The new pathway will not be cheap.

A five-year visa will cost a relatively moderate $343 per person. But a mandatory surcharge to access Britain's state-run health service will run to $4,280 per adult, and $3,224 for those under 18.

Shorter, cheaper visas for 30 months will also be available.

Security law

"We have been clear we won't look the other way when it comes to Hong Kong. We will live up to our historic responsibility to its people," Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said.

"China's imposition of the National Security Law in Hong Kong constitutes a clear and serious breach of the [pre-handover]Sino-British Joint Declaration contrary to international law," he added.

The security law was imposed on Hong Kong last June in response to 2019 protests, targeting acts Beijing deems to be secession, subversion, terrorism or collusion with foreign forces.

Mass arrests of pro-democracy figures have followed. Some have fled Hong Kong for the West, including to Britain.

Between July and this month, about 7,000 people with BN(O) status and their dependents have already been given exceptional leave to live in Britain.

China, furious at Britain's new visa pathway, has in turn accused London of flouting the handover agreement and demanded Western countries stay out of Hong Kong's affairs.

Continued here:

Britain Upholding 'Freedom and Autonomy' With New HK Visas - VOA Asia

Lisa Mantini

Stillwater

To the editor:

What an unusual combo on page A4 (Thursday), a letter by a writer who gets his facts wrong and who seems quite angry about it, combined with an essay by Rich Lowry seemingly arguing that we should support free speech under all cases, facts notwithstanding.

I find the conflict between the need for accuracy in reporting and for freedom of speech to be a very difficult one. We all accept that you cant shout Fire in a crowded theater when youre lying, because people will get hurt in the crush to reach the exits. But former President Trump weaponized lying to an extent not seen before in American history. And we see what we got from his lies about the security of the 2020 presidential election: a murderous, angry mob attacking our very democracy, and many folks continuing to believe that the election, our most secure in recent history according to Trumps own government, was rigged.

What to do?

For me, I check the reliability of my news sources at places like adfontesmedia.com. Notice that the AP, UPI, and Reuters are at the very top of their chart, rated as unbiased and as containing original fact reporting. I also watch NBC News, rated as skews left and highly accurate with Fact Reporting. But I avoid both MSNBC, rated as hyperpartisan left and high variation in reliability and Fox TV, rated as hyper-partisan right and Selective or incomplete story, unfair persuasion, propaganda.

I would urge all consumers of media to peruse their chart, in order to be aware of the quality of what you choose to read and watch.

We are making critical coverage of the coronavirus available for free. Please consider subscribing so we can continue to bring you the latest news and information on this developing story.

Visit link:

LETTERS: Freedom of the Press | Opinion | stwnewspress.com - Stillwater News Press

On Jan. 8, Twitter permanently suspended former U.S. President Donald Trumps account, "@realDonaldTrump," on the grounds that Trump might use it to further incite violence, violating the company's Glorification of Violence Policy.

Some appreciated the ban as a necessary move against hate speech whereas others, such as German Chancellor Angela Merkel, thought it went too far as a violation of freedom of expression.

The suspension, controversial all on its own, is a display of a wider scope and more complex issue: social media platforms and their implications for the protection of freedom of expression.

Freedom of expression is recognized and protected by several states and international instruments, and it can only be restricted under certain conditions. Accordingly, countries have negative and positive obligations for the protection of freedom of expression.

However, with the development of technology, states are no longer the only interferer and duty bearer for protection, and it is no longer possible to evaluate freedom of expression from a dual perspective within the framework of the state-individual relationship.

Therefore, social media platforms and their implications for protecting freedom of expression should be assessed while taking into account states, individuals and social media platforms.

The nature and classification, whether public or private, of social media is important for determining the rights and obligations of states, social media platforms and individuals with regard to freedom of speech.

If social media platforms are regarded as solely belonging to the private sphere, where the relationship is governed by the terms and conditions of platforms, the social media company might remove content, suspend accounts and refuse to provide services as per their terms and conditions, whether the action has a legal basis or not.

In his explanation regarding the suspension of Trumps account, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey mentioned that people can go to other services if they are not happy with Twitters terms and conditions.

This is a clear example of how the relationship between social media platforms and individuals is seen as purely contractual, i.e. private, and therefore the relationship can be governed only as per the terms and conditions.

However, since social media platforms are mostly monopolies, removal or suspension disables access to a particular social media channel, and even though not legally binding, companies are expected to comply with human rights obligations. It is clear that social media platforms cannot have absolute say over removal and suspension based on their terms and conditions.

In addition, even though social media platforms operate as per private law, they increasingly constitute a "modern public square" for speech, therefore, they are not purely private.

For this reason, social media platforms policies should comply with human rights law. Therefore, human rights due diligence and remedy mechanisms should be made available by them.

Different states' viewpoints on these issues, their expectations from social media companies and the responsibilities they put on the platforms for content-monitoring may differ.

In some states, where the relationship between social media platforms and individuals are accepted mostly within the private sphere, there is not a special regulation that obliges social media platforms to monitor content.

Under these circumstances, social media platforms may voluntarily prefer to monitor and remove the content and accounts that are illegal, such as those consisting of hate speech, child abuse, threats to national security or violations of their policies, whether the policies have a legal basis or not.

However, voluntary removal may lead to an arbitrary practice by social media platforms since most of the time, their terms of conditions are not clear and they lack adequate governance on the conditions for removal, restriction or termination of access to a service.

On the contrary, some states hold social media companies liable when they refuse a request to remove content or suspend an account. Moreover, they require social media platforms to regulate content and remove or suspend content when necessary.

For example, in Germany, under the Network Enforcement Act, social media platforms are obliged to remove illegal content or be subjected to fines up to 50 million euros ($60.53 million).

Even though this may seem like a more legal and secure approach, the biggest problem is that then the platform will operate out of fear of fines. This problem becomes more tricky and complicated with the employment of automatic filters.

YouTube, for example, automatically deleted a U.K. human rights watchdogs videos showing Syrian atrocities even though there was an obvious condemnation of violence. In other words, the videos were not illegal.

In addition, people in charge of watching over content may not necessarily have the required information about relevant laws and the principles for restriction. Combined with the lack of warning, open-case policy and not providing the right to defense, over-removal and a lack of legal infrastructure of which the states are partly responsible may lead to more severe human rights breaches.

In that case, governments may be held liable for the human rights breaches arising from social media platforms removal and suspension since states were the ones incentivizing self-regulation.

Although constantly changing technology and the use of social media platforms by users residing in different jurisdictions makes it difficult to adopt a single promising approach states should enact an appropriate and balanced regulatory framework for content-monitoring, and social media platforms should have an open policy, due diligence on human rights and remedy mechanisms regarding removals and suspensions.

Visit link:

Social media platforms and freedom of expression | Daily Sabah - Daily Sabah

29 January 2021: Today we are calling on all International Olympic Committee (IOC) and International Paralympic Committee (IPC) TOP Sponsors to demand that the IOC and IPC respect athlete freedom of expression and rescind Olympic Charter Rule 50.2 and IPC Section 2.2. The suppression of athlete speech at the Olympic and Paralympic Games and the racist history of that suppression is antithetical to the values TOP Sponsors espouse. To protect their investments and uphold their social responsibilities, these companies must immediately call for the IOC and IPC to align with the United Nations Universal Human Rights.

TOP Sponsors have responded to the current moment by strongly condemning structural racism and committing to making their companies and the world more inclusive. Now is the time to act on those promises.

With an investment of USD 1.03 billion per quadrennial, TOP Sponsors have the power and the responsibility to shape global sport and ensure that universal human rights extend to every athlete from every sport and every corner of the globe: on the podium, on the field of play, and peacefully protesting at home.

For 53 years, Rule 50.2 has been used as a tool of racial oppression. It has violated athletes universal right to freedom of expression and has been used to silence athletes who raise their voices, or their fists, for justice. Without action, TOP Sponsors are complicit in this oppression.

It is time for change. Over the past two years we have seen corporations around the world, including many TOP Sponsors, recognize their social responsibility and broaden their purpose to serve all stakeholders. Marketing investments in the Olympic and Paralympic movements must be a part of this corporate realignment; continued support of the IOC and IPC must be contingent on the sport administrators upholding human rights for all athletes. After all, the value of the investment comes from athletes.

Silencing the athlete voice has led to oppression, silence has led to abuse, and silence has led to discrimination in sport. It is time for the underwriters of the Olympic and Paralympic movements to hold the IOC and IPC accountable. Athletes and human rights must come first.

Olympic & Paralympic TOP Sponsors include:

Airbnb*, Alibaba Group, Allianz, Atos, Bridgestone*, Coca Cola*, Dow*(only Olympic), General Electric*(only Olympic), Intel*, Omega, ottobock. (only Paralympic), Panasonic*, Procter & Gamble*, Samsung*, Toyota*, Visa*

*Denotes statements made to stand for social and racial injustice.

Comments on the IOCs Consultation on Athlete Demonstrations

The IOCs Consultation on Athlete Demonstrations is an inadequate response to the current movement. Global Athlete has worked with independent social science and marketing research experts to analyze recent surveys conducted by athlete groups, including the IOCs survey. The experts indicate that the survey methodologies and subsequent reporting are flawed and are not in line with research best practice. Consequently, the results may be unreliable or of little value in attempting to draw conclusions about athlete views on demonstrations at the Olympic and Paralympic Games. Link to reviews

In addition, the IOCs Athlete365 website, on a page dedicated to Rule 50 information, includes a list of NOC Findings with correlating links. Conspicuously absent are the findings of the US Olympic and Paralympic Committee who came out with a strong stance in support of athlete freedom of expression as a human right. Link to statement

The IOC and IPC do not compensate or employ athletes attending the Games. In fact, the IOC and IPC require athletes to sign away many rights. After devoting years of their lives to qualify for the Olympics/Paralympics, athletes have no choice but to sign these documents. Athletes do not voluntarily give up these rights; they are given the false choice between maintaining their rights and continuing their careers.

If athletes want to speak up in a way which respects the rights and freedoms of others as detailed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights the sport community, and sponsors, should embrace their diverse opinions. Silencing athletes should never be tolerated and to threaten them with removal from the Olympic/Paralympic Games is another sign of the imbalance of power between sport leaders and athletes.As a service to our readers, Around the Rings will provide verbatim texts of selected press releases issued by Olympic-related organizations, federations, businesses and sponsors.

These press releases appear as sent to Around the Rings and are not edited for spelling, grammar or punctuation.

25 Years at #1: Your best source of news about the Olympics is http://www.aroundtherings.com, for subscribers only

Go here to see the original:

Olympic and Paralympic Sponsors Must Protect Athletes' Rights to Freedom of Expression - Around the Rings

(LWI) - The Evangelical Lutheran Church in Denmark has raised concerns about proposed legislation that would require all religious sermons to be translated into Danish. In an open letter to government leaders, the Churchs Council on International Relations says the draft law will create suspicion and marginalization of minority groups and could pave the way for religious harassment.

In the letter, sent to Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Church Affairs Minister Joy Morgensen, church leaders say the planned law marks the latest in a series of bills that [] send negative political signals about the role of religion in society, suggesting that religious practice is an obstacle to integration into an open and pluralistic society.

Warning that these developments undermine the freedoms on which our common society is based, the church leaders say the legislation would weaken the integration that the bill is supposed to strengthen. The Danish parliament is due to debate the proposed law in February. If passed, it would require all sermons and other speeches made in a liturgical context to be delivered in Danish or made available in translation.

The Lutheran World Federation (LWF) General Secretary Rev. Dr Martin Junge reiterated these concerns on 26 January, writing to Danish government leaders that: This proposed legislation is contrary to specific provisions of the freedom of religion or belief, enshrined in international human rights law.

In a letter to the prime minister, written on behalf of the LWFs global communion of 148 member churches, Junge notes that, while the intention of the bill may be to promote greater transparency and accountability from religious communities, the ultimate effect is likely to contradict these objectives.

Such a law, he says, would not only impose an extra financial and logistical burden on religious communities, but also risk enabling discrimination, prejudice and negative public sentiment against minority religions. Junge points to several cases in which Lutheran churches in minority situations have been victims of such legislation, highlighting concerns that the proposed bill will encourage and further escalate the adoption of similar restrictive measures globally.

In his letter, the LWF leader urges Denmark to set a good example for other countries, to reconsider the direction the proposed bill is taking and to discuss with a wide spectrum of religious communities in Denmark other appropriate approaches and solutions. Such action, he adds, would provide a unique opportunity to foster cohesion [] communication and cooperation among minority and majority religions.

The Lutheran leaders letter echoes the words of an appeal from Denmarks National Council of Churches which represents sixteen different Christian denominations. In a similar message to the prime minister, the Council says the proposed legislation is not only a violation of the Danish tradition of freedom and diversity, but also against the Lutheran tradition which always emphasizes the importance of the mother tongue.

The Council adds that under the proposed law, Christian denominations including the Catholic, Orthodox and Anglican churches, the German and French Reformed churches and also a wide range of free churches and migrant communities will be placed under suspicion. Over 74 percent of the population belongs to the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Denmark.

The Commission of Bishops Conferences of the European Union (COMECE), representing Catholic Churches in the blocs 27 member countries, has also issued a statement calling for dialogue between Denmarks public authorities and the countrys churches and religious communities. When devising anti-radicalization and anti-terrorism policies, the statement says, EU member states should take into account that the EU Counter-terrorism agenda itself underlines that freedom of religion is among the foundations of the European Union.

LWF/P. Hitchen

See more here:

Denmark urged to respect religious freedom - The Lutheran World Federation

Initiation of the Phase 2b FREEDOM trial represents the next step in development of CLBS16 as a potential breakthrough treatment for the millions of sufferers of CMD in the U.S., most of whom are women

Patient enrollment underway atTheChrist Hospital Health Network in Cincinnati (OH) and Mayo Clinic in Rochester (MN) with additional sites across the United States targeted to open soon

Strong investigator and subject interest driven by the positive results of the Phase 2a ESCaPE-CMD trial reported in spring of 2020

BASKING RIDGE, N.J. (January 29, 2021) Caladrius Biosciences, Inc.,a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company dedicated to the development of cellular therapies designed to reverse disease, announced that it has treated the first patient in its Phase 2b FREEDOM trial of CLBS16 as a therapy for coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) at TheChrist Hospital Health Network in Cincinnati, Ohio. The 105-patient double-blind and placebo-controlled clinical trial is designed to further evaluate the efficacy and safety of intracoronary delivery of autologous CD34+ cells (CLBS16) in subjects with CMD and without obstructive coronary artery disease.

We are very excited about our CLBS16 program as it represents a potential breakthrough in the treatment of CMD, a condition which afflicts millions of patients in the US alone, many of whom are women. As a result, CMD is a womens health issue of emerging importance as currently there are no products with approved labeling for coronary microvascular dysfunction, said David J. Mazzo, PhD, President and Chief Executive Officer of Caladrius. The treatment of the first patient in the FREEDOM trial is an important milestone for our Company and the program and we look forward to completing enrollment by the target of year-end 2021. It is especially noteworthy that even during the COVID-19 pandemic, physicians and patients are active in our trial, denoting the seriousness of the disease and underscoring the lack of available effective treatment for CMD.

Following the outstanding full data results from the ESCaPE-CMD study that I presented at SCAI 2020, we are very excited to participate in the FREEDOM trial, said Timothy D. Henry, M.D., Medical Director of the Carl and Edyth Lindner Center for Research at TheChrist Hospital Health Network. Caladrius CLBS16 program has demonstrated great promise and I am looking forward to seeing how this new therapeutic option can benefit patients with CMD.

For more information on this study, please visitclinicaltrials.gov(identifier: NCT04614467).

If you are a patient or a physician and have questions about eligibility for this study, please visitwww.freedom-trial.com.

About Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction

Coronary microvascular dysfunction is a type of non-obstructive coronary artery disease that causes decreased blood flow to the heart muscle that affects approximately 8.3 million people in the U.S.1,2With common symptoms that include recurring, debilitating chest pain, tiredness, and shortness of breath, many CMD patients are undiagnosed because of the absence of large vessel obstruction. Due to an under appreciation of the disease, patients, the majority of whom are women, often go years without proper treatment. When a diagnosis of CMD is missed, patients are untreated and remain at high risk of heart attack and/or cardiovascular-related death._______________________[1] Mittal, S.R.; Indian Heart Journal, Volume 66, 2014, Pages 678681[2] Cleveland Clinic/AHA (American Heart Association)

About Caladrius Biosciences

Caladrius Biosciences, Inc. is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company dedicated to the development of cellular therapies designed to reverse disease. We are developing first-in-class cell therapy products based on the finely tuned mechanisms for self-repair that exist in the human body. Our technology leverages and enables these mechanisms in the form of specific cells, using formulations and modes of delivery unique to each medical indication.

The Companys current product candidates include: HONEDRA (formerly CLBS12), recipient of SAKIGAKE designation and eligible for early conditional approval in Japan for the treatment of critical limb ischemia (CLI) based on the results of an ongoing clinical trial; OLOGO (formerly CLBS14), a Regenerative Medicine Advanced Therapy (RMAT) designated therapy for which the Company has finalized with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (the FDA) a protocol for a Phase 3 confirmatory trial in subjects with no-option refractory disabling angina (NORDA); CLBS16, the subject of both a recently completed positive Phase 2a study and a newly initiated Phase 2b study in the U.S. for the treatment of coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD); CLBS119, an emergent CD34+ stem cell therapy responding to the COVID-19 pandemic and the potentially permanent damage the virus inflicts on the lungs of many patients; and CLBS201, designed to assess the safety and efficacy of CD34+ cell therapy as a treatment for chronic kidney disease (CKD). For more information on the company, please visitwww.caladrius.com.

Continue reading here:

Caladrius Biosciences Treats First Patient in the Phase 2b FREEDOM Trial of CLBS16 for the Treatment of Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction - Cath Lab...