The purpose of this study, which was done in conjunction with the Arizona Heart Foundation, was to evaluate whether pyridoxine accelerates ulcer wound healing in diabetic patients with ulcers in the lower extremities. In this study, 100 mg of pyridoxine per day was given to patients in the experimental group (while they receive normal wound treatment) while patients in the control group received normal treatment of wounds without the pyridoxine. Over time, wound healing was evaluated by photographing and then measuring the size of patients' ulcer wounds on the photographs. Results from the experimental group were compared with those of the control group to evaluate the efficacy of the pyridoxine treatment. In addition, comparisons of the healing rates were made with respect to whether the patients smoked, had hypertension or hypotension, and the patients' body mass indexes. It has been found that there was no statistically significant difference in the mean healing rates between the control groups and experimental groups. In addition, it has been found that smoking, BMI and blood pressure did not have a statistically appreciable effect on the difference in mean healing rates between the control and experimental groups. This is evidence that pyridoxine did not have a statistically significant effect on wound healing rates.

Carbohydrate counting has been shown to improve HbA1c levels for people with diabetes. However, the learning curve and inconvenience of carbohydrate counting make it difficult for patients to adhere to it. A deep learning model is proposed to identify food from an image, where it can help the user manage their carbohydrate counting. This early model has a 68.3% accuracy of identifying 101 different food classes. A more refined model in future work could be deployed into a mobile application to identify food the user is about to consume and log it for easier carbohydrate counting.

Lab-grown food products of animal cell origin, now becoming popularly coined as, ‘Cellular Agriculture’ is a revolutionary breakthrough technology that has the potential to penetrate the lives of every American or citizen of the world. It is important to recognize that the impetus for developing this technology is fueled by environmental concerns with climate change, rising geopolitical instability, and population growth projections, where farm-grown food has now become a growing national security issue. Notwithstanding its potential, in addition to the necessary technological innovation and economic scalability, the market success of cellular agriculture will depend greatly on regulatory oversight by multiple government agencies without which it can cause undue harm to individuals, populations, and the environment. Thus, it is critical for those appropriate United States governing bodies to ensure that the technology being developed is both safe and of an acceptable quality for human consumption and has no adverse environmental impact. As such, animal foods, derived from farms, previously regulated almost exclusively by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) are now being regulated under a joint formal agreement between the US Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) and the USDA if derived from the lab, i.e., lab-grown animal foods. The main reason for joint oversight between the FDA and the USDA is that the FDA has developed the in-house expertise to oversee primary cell harvesting and cell storage, as well as, cell growth and differentiation for the development of 3D-engineered tissues intended for tissue and organ replacement for the emerging field of regenerative medicine. As such, the FDA has been given the authority to oversee the ‘front end’ of lab-grown food processes which relies on the very same processes utilized in engineered human tissues to produce food-grade engineered tissues. Oversight then transitions to the USDA-FSIS (Food Safety and Inspection Service) during the harvesting stage of the cell culture process. The USDA-FSIS then oversees the further production and labeling of these products. Included in the agreement is the understanding that both bodies are responsible for communicating necessary information to each other and collaboratively developing new regulatory actions as needed. However, there currently lacks clarity on some topics regarding certain legal, ethical, and scientific issues. Lab-grown meat products require more extensive regulation than farm-grown animal food products to ensure that they are safe and nutritious for consumption. To do this, CFSAN can create new classes of lab-grown foods, such as ‘lab-grown USDA foods,’ ‘lab-grown non-USDA foods,’ ‘lab-grown extinct foods,’ ‘lab-grown human food tissues,’ and ‘medically activated lab-grown foods.’