Hope for stem cell research. by Misstressahara

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Hope for stem cell research.

POSTED BY: MISSTRESSAHARA
UPDATED: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 17:12
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1242
PAGE 1 of 1

Wednesday, August 23, 2006 12:51 PM

Scientists Harvest Stem Cells Without Destroying Embryo

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Breakthrough technique might get around moral issues, experts say
By Amanda Gardner, HealthDay Reporter

WEDNESDAY, Aug. 23 (HealthDay News) -- In what could prove to be a medical milestone, researchers have succeeded in generating new lines of human embryonic stem cells without destroying the embryo.

The breakthrough may enable scientists to circumvent the ban on federal funding of stem cell research, paving the way for gains in treating or curing diseases such as diabetes, spinal injury and Alzheimer's disease.

"The whole goal of this is to increase the number of stem cell lines available for federal funding and give the field a badly needed jump-start," said Dr. Robert Lanza, senior author of a paper appearing in the Aug. 24 issue of Nature and medical director of Advanced Cell Technology in Worcester, Mass.

Lanza was cautiously optimistic, although he said the final say on whether this strategy could widen U.S. embryonic stem cell research depends on politicians, not scientists.

"The approach described here does not involve the destruction of an embryo, nor does the biopsied cell ever develop into an embryo at any point. Therefore, we hope this method can be used to increase the number of stem cell lines available for federal funding - and thus give the field a badly needed jump-start," Lanza said. "But I guess we'll have to see what the President and Congress have to say about it all."

The promise of embryonic stem cells lies in their ability to be "pluripotent," and develop into any cell type in the body. Experts envision a future where stem cells might help replace diseased or injured tissue, thereby treating a host of ailments.

However, many object to the destruction of embryos inherent in this research. For that reason, embryonic stem cell research in the United States has been severely restricted since Aug. 9, 2001, when President Bush placed limits on federal funding of the field. As of that date, federal funds could only be used to study stem cell lines derived from embryos that had been already been destroyed before the limit was set.

This has turned out to be fewer lines than originally thought, and even fewer high-quality lines.

And while some state and private money has emerged to fill the gap in research funding, experts say it's not been nearly enough. Most scientists agree that federal resources are needed if any credible research gains are to take place.

So far, scientists have obtained embryonic stem cells by taking groups of cells from early embryos before they implant in the uterus. However, this process involves the destruction of the embryo.

Lanza's new paper improves on research his team did last year. In that study, the Massachusetts group succeeded in cultivating mouse embryonic stem cell lines by removing just one cell from the mouse embryo. The procedure is similar to that used for pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, used to check for genetic disorders during in vitro fertilization (IVF). In this case, the mouse embryos survived.

But then, a roadblock. "We tried to apply that to a human system and found that it does not work," Lanza said. "We had to work out a different technique and initially we weren't sure that it was going to work. It was pretty tough. Eventually it worked like a charm."

Here's how. According to Lanza, the new research involved 16 human embryos left over from IVF.

"We used a single-cell biopsy technique to pluck out one cell when the embryo was at the 8-to-10-cell stage," Lanza explained. This is the same stage used for pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. Excising a cell at this point doesn't interfere with the embryo's development, the scientist explained.

However, the cells apparently do not like being co-cultured alone, so they were put into a dish with other cells. This technique worked to keep them alive.

Using this method, Lanza and his team managed to get two stable human embryonic stem cell lines that behaved like conventional embryonic stem cell lines.

"They've now been growing for over eight months, are entirely normal genetically and they were able to generate all of the cell types of the body," Lanza said.

"The real importance of this is the potential that you could have embryonic stem cell lines that are pluripotent from embryos that aren't destroyed," said Paul Sanberg, director of the Center for Aging and Brain Repair at the University of South Florida College of Medicine in Tampa. "If these cell lines were allowed, it could help enhance embryonic stem cell research."

Lanza's company will be working with the scientific community to make the stem cell lines widely available.

"With the right resources, we could recreate as many lines as the scientific community needs without harming the embryos and help other researchers develop the technique," Lanza said. "We could move very quickly."

Next year, he said, Advanced Cell Technology will be filing an investigational new drug application aimed at the eye condition known as macular degeneration.

______________________________________________________________

This is a good thing, dontcha think?

If I'm a bitch, then life just got interesting

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 23, 2006 1:52 PM

CANTTAKESKY

Quote:
Originally posted by Misstressahara:
This is a good thing, dontcha think?

It would seem so. But I'd hate to BE that embryo from whom they plucked 10% of my cells (1 cell out of the 8-10 cell stage). I mean, do we REALLY know what that would do to the person--ya know if he ever gets to grow up? It is experimenting on a human being without his consent, assuming that the embryo won't be discarded. And if the embryo is never going to get to become a full grown human, why go through all that trouble?

All this stem cell controversy makes me sick. In the 50's through the 70's, a guy named Robert Becker MD was doing some extremely promising research on dedifferentiation of normal cells. Yep...taking a full grown differentiated cell and converting it into a "pluripotent" embryonic-like undifferentiated cell. His lab got shut down in 1981, for who knows why. If he had been able to continue with that line of research, or if anyone else had joined in that line of research, we'd probably be able to create stem cells by now, without involving embryos at all. The technology is there. No one wants to touch it. Instead, they hem and haw about how they can't progress with curing diseases because of the ethical controversies of stem cell research.

Bullshit. Sorry, this topic really, really pisses me off. I have a very good friend paralyzed in a wheelchair. When I think she might be that much closer to walking today if Becker's lab hadn't been shut down, or if someone else had picked up his work, it gets my goat that they use the stem cell controversy as an excuse to not make any progress.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 23, 2006 2:11 PM

DREAMTROVE

Moved to "Debate Over"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 10, 2008 10:54 PM

JAYNEZTOWN

Barely a week since his momentous victory, US president-elect Barack Obama is bringing joy to long-suffering stem-cell researchers.

For years, US progress has been crippled by restrictions introduced in August 2001 by president George W Bush, preventing federally funded researchers from working on all but a few sources of embryonic stem cells - the cells from embryos with huge medical potential for repairing organs and tissues.

Now, those restrictions will be among the first of Bush's executive orders to be swept away, probably within the next 100 days. The news emerged on Sunday from an interview on Fox News featuring John Podesta, the head of Obama's "transition team", which is managing the switch to power.

The executive orders that restrict the stem-cell lines could be withdrawn unilaterally by Obama, he said.

"There's a lot that the president can do using his executive authority without waiting for congressional action, and I think we'll see the president do that," said Podesta, a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, who, in 2003, co-founded with Hillary Clinton the Center for American Progress - a think-tank embodying many of Obama's stated ideals for transforming the US.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16007-obama-plans-to-sweep-bush-
stemcell-restrictions-aside.html

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 11, 2008 8:08 AM

PHOENIXROSE

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.

Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:
I mean, do we REALLY know what that would do to the person--ya know if he ever gets to grow up?

Quote:
Originally posted by Misstressahara:
This is the same stage used for pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. Excising a cell at this point doesn't interfere with the embryo's development.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 11, 2008 8:15 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Removing 1 cell is a minor version of what happens when identical twins are formed - where roughly half the embryo hives off and both halves then go on to form complete individuals.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 11, 2008 8:22 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Bush has never banned embryonic stem cell research.

Private funding for research has never been hindered under Bush

States are allowed to use their own $$ for what ever ESC research they deem necessary

By a huge margin, Adult stem cells have proven to be far more effective in treatments and cures. To date, none of the Embryonic Stem Cell treatments have proven useful or helpful.

Since Bush' ban on Federal funds for Embryonic Stem Cells, several new and productive sources for stem cells have been discovered.

If embryonic stem cell research was SOOOO important, then private funds would have been spent to get a jump on the vacuum of Fed Funds, on the assumption that fabulous and cutting edge treatments could be found, and LOTS AND LOTS of $$ could be reaped by those who invested in ESC.

The hype over Embryonic stem cells is just that. Hype.

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 11, 2008 3:44 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

I would like to agree with Mr. Raptor. While the Federal government has restricted the use of Federal funds, private outfits continue their research with private funds.

More importantly, many labs do continue to perform promising research on creating undifferentiated cells from adult tissue. I'm sure Rue, or one of our other resident scientists, can give us much more information on this.

That having been said, it is equally promising to see that the Federal funds limit may soon vaporize. I see no reason not to explore all possible avenues to curing disease. Since we are currently discarding these valuable tissues wholesale, it is a waste that will soon be stemmed.

I am quite confident that continuing research on stem cells will enable us to create these cells without any need to rely on proverbial sacrificial lambs.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 8, 2008 5:09 PM

DREAMTROVE

Auraptor,

You're still a dick. Nothing personal. Bush is a monkey on a string, and Cheney is a Dick.

Of course stem cell research was hindered under Bush because he banned new lines, and because he never funded any research.

False hope coming from democrats here:

The whole tactic was to delay the development of the industry until big pharm could take it over. Big surprise there.

Reality? The US will now be supplanted in its own field of expertise. Again.

I swear, our country has the political IQ of a rabbit, and now I'm convinced that it is a singularity equally shared between both parties.

Okay. I haven't posted here in a couple years, so here's my short take on this election:

1. I like Obama as a person. I think he's a globalist tool as a politician. I like his original cabinet picks. I hate the clintonistas he ended up with. I think at the moment Shinseki for VA is the only thing I really agree with.

2. I liked McCain and Palin but they ran a stupid campaign that deserved to lose. Huckabee would have been a better choice, and McCain should have stuck to his own record.

3. It's a no brainer to anyone who knows me that I was rooting for Ron Paul. I suspect that in a firefly forum that this was probably a majority opinion, unless people really didn't get the show's extreme libertarian bent.

Obama will probably be good for stem cell research, but his fellow democrats are just as corrupt as the republicans they replace. In the case of the advisor core, they're actually the same people. Still, it will be good for fledgeling industry, and overall, a good change for the american internation image. Temporarily. Until he screws it up by invading Pakistan.

Other than that, not expecting a lot of change.

Replacing the bowling alley with a basketball court is probably the most radical change this white house is seeing.

Yah, you don't have to tell me I'm a cynic, I already know :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 8, 2008 5:44 PM

DREAMTROVE

Rue,

I wholeheartedly agree. The ideological argument underlying the matter is absurd. During fertility treatments, thousands of clones are made for the hope of one human. But people are missing the whole point:

As a solid supporter of RTL, I have to argue with my conservative coleagues here: You're hinging the whole argument on meaningless semantics which have no connection to the core issue. The limiting factor of life is not and was never the availability of seeds.

Take us, as human beings, animals, and omnivores. We eat primarily seeds, or we should, as omnivores. If we eat meat and vegetables instead, we're bound to live a shorter less healthy life. Those seeds are not limited in the number of plants they can spawn by the availability of seeds, but by the availability of resources.

Now where I would differ from my pro-choice firefly colleagues is that they would weigh in with concepts like financial resources that I don't really think have bearing on the validity of life, and I certainly won't entertain the individual will of one person to decide whether anyone or anything gets to live or die.

Now, I got a lot of flack for this before when I talked about birth control in the third world and people hurled some insults at me, but my point was the same: resources. Sure, if 1 million children would starve due to lack of resources, but 500,000 would not, then reducing the birth rate make sense, from a pro-life perspective. I am not, nor am I ever going to support the Rockefeller "population control" model for global society. I think the concept is appalling and borders on fascist.

But with new technologies, the availability of "seeds" in a human system is already basically infinite, as is the availability of genetic diversity, which has never been a prerequisite for RTL. So, it stands to reason that the only factor involved here is limit of resources.

If everyone remembers Hannah, the Snowflake Baby, who Sam Brownback mentioned 200,000 times on the senate floor, it's important to bear in mind that Hannah was one of 400 clones. Human cloning maybe "illegal" in a vague sense, but in a very real sense, it's everyday practice.

Furthermore, each cell in a blastocyst has that seed potential, but they are destined to be a part of a human, not a whole human. If stem cells are used for the same purpose, than is this not the creation of life? The growth of a new heart or liver is not only assisting in the continuation of life for some unfortunate soul like another Hannah, Hannah Jones (don't even get me started on how much this is NOT a "right to die" case, what a moronic idea, this is a refusal of treatment case, which is a right that people should have. The treatment mandated by the state would likely not have saved Jones but killed her. These decisions we make for ourselves based on our own information, but I digress.)

Anyway, not only does this new cellular life add to the preservation of human consciousness, but also, it is life in its own sense. The world is full of lifeforms without higher thought processes, our houses are full of them, as are our lives, and in fact, our very survival is dependent on them at every level, not just through the foods we eat, but the myriad symbionts we carry in our systems, and the countless stem cells that make up the non-brain part of us.

All of these are part of the essential resource core needed to support a human being. Without the resources, then there is no life to be saved.

I would please, for the love of whatever god you do or do not believe in, not let us get into an argument on the level of whether a pregnancy constitutes the supply of resources, and then slide into the hell of the abortion debate. Everyone, I hope, can accept that some people are pro-life, and some are pro-choice, and no one is likely to change anyone's mind on this topic, so please don't waste everyone's time.

But at the same time, let's be reasonable. The issue of stem cell research in the framework of RTL, or outside of it, should be internally consistant.

Simply, I'd like to add that Hannah Jones has as much right to life as anyone, esp. being already alive. As does Hannah the Snowflake, though one has a terminal birth defect and the other is a clone, these are not important issues. People, or potential people, with the resources to support them, are like plants with water and soil and sun.

Cells in test tubes are like seeds in vats with no resources that could ever make them into individual life forms.

[/rant]

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 8, 2008 6:02 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

DreamTrove

Where ya' BEEN all this time ???!!

Last I remember, you were somewhere in NYS growing table crops. Anyway, GREAT to see you back !

"Auraptor,
You're still a dick. Nothing personal."

Hey, some things never change. At least there are things you can count on in this world !

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 8, 2008 6:16 PM

DREAMTROVE

Thanks

Working. I actually had a random chance encounter which lead to a business deal. I still grow tomatos. I'm not sure if they get an e, and don't care. But yeah, nothing changes here, that's for sure. That's why everyone lives to be 110. I come from Shangri La. I think this effects my world view. Things fly by me and I miss them.

Now, if only I could get a govt. bailout. I think that I could really cut a deal. For 4.6 billion, they can bail me out. I'm sure it will benefit the economy. Of course, I don't have any debt, or a history of incompetence, and I can construct a sentence, so I guess that's out.

Speaking of which, is Henry Paulson the dumbest person on Earth? It seems you have to be a total moron to become a billionaire in the new economy. I used to think that Dep Sec of State Douglas Feith was the dumbest man ever to hold public office, and he probably was, but now we have Paulson.

Anyway, how about you? Anything new over there?

Oh, another note, I joined a sci-fi writers group. Long story. Not a small one either.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 8, 2008 6:35 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

I'm still going about as I was going about when we last chatted. I guess there are more than a few things that don't change ! A few more earthquakes under my belt, a few years older - that's about it.

I'm really GLAD you seem to be doing well !

I'm going off to do some cooking for the week now, but PLEASE

post about your writing ! (... if you care to share, that is.) And don't be such a stranger.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, December 9, 2008 3:24 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

dreamtrove,

Go fuck yourself. Nothing personal. Under Bush, more $$ by far has been spent Federally for stem cell research. More $$ than an other Presidents combined. If you were 1/10th concerned about the true benefits and scientific breakthroughs concerning this issue, you'd appreciate to a very large degree what this administration has done. Instead, you've swallowed hook, line and sinker for the nonsense that's put out by activist for other causes.

Also, stem cell lines are basically ever lasting, so the call for NEW lines is a bit exaggerated. Bush has allowed the continuation of current lines of stem cells to be used, just not NEW ones. And again, there's nothing prohibiting any PRIVATE funding for research to continue.

Tom Okarma, CEO Of The Stem Cell Company Geron: "So the stuff you hear published that all of those lines are irrevocably contaminated with mouse materials and could never be used in people - hogwash. If you know how to grow them, they're fine." (Steven Edwards, "Scrutinizing A Stem Cell Trial," Wired News, 3/29/06)

Finally, its Adult Stem cells, not Embryonic, that have yielded actual results in treatments. While you and your dreamers are wishing for that far away day when eSCR actually pays its freight, aSCR is treating people, finding cures and living up to the hopes and GIVING hope to those who othewise would be still left looking.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, December 9, 2008 4:35 AM

DREAMTROVE

Auraptor:

You're a moron.

1. The Bush administration is a junta run by some left wing socialist nutjobs, no offense to left wing socialists, who pose as conservatives.

2. Those same nutjobs are now filling the ranks of the Obama admin. Anyone who doesn't believe this can go look it up. Also, check today's headline "Bush and democrats push for bailout" then check back at the last eight years and see "Bush and democrats push for patriot act, war..." to everything else.

3. Republicans let this happen not because it's what they stand for but because the GOP is hopelessly corrupt. Until they clean house, count me out. Watching partisan politics is like watching a mafioso and a crooked cop argue about morality. No offense to any actual mafiosos.

4. You know jack about stem cells, clearly. Don't lecture people, many of whom here have actually worked in the field, about a science you know nothing about. You're comments on science aren't worth the time to reply to.

Oh, screw it, why am I even writing. I'm reminding myself of that cartoon "someone is wrong on the internet!"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, December 9, 2008 4:52 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

I know more than the headlines which most idiots on here or who have any opinion about everything read.

It's funny to listen to you say the Bush administration is a " junta ". Sure, there may be some Left wingers posing as conservatives in there, but no worse than the real left wingers who'd be in there for the past 8 yrs, had Gore or Kerry won. THey didn't.

D.C. seems to be hopelessly corrupt, no matter who enters, be it Democrat or Republican.

Dream, you're a true lint licker.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 10, 2008 4:57 PM

DREAMTROVE

Quote:
I know more than the headlines which most idiots on here or who have any opinion about everything read.

You underestimate us. People here, some of them, are really well informed, certainly on this topic.

Quote:
It's funny to listen to you say the Bush administration is a " junta ". Sure, there may be some Left wingers posing as conservatives in there, but no worse than the real left wingers who'd be in there for the past 8 yrs, had Gore or Kerry won. THey didn't.

D.C. seems to be hopelessly corrupt, no matter who enters, be it Democrat or Republican.

This is relatively astute. The second paragraph should talk to the first paragraph and convince it that there is no partisanship in washington outside of the struggle for power.

Quote:
Dream, you're a true lint licker.

This doesn't even mean anything. It's like trying to be an insult, but doesn't have anything to say.

I get the feeling that me and Rue could have a debate on this topic, I'm not sure anyone else is up for it. Don't feel bad about it, just please don't waste our time. It's like rants about who really discovered america. We're all so-o-o passed that now.

We get it. Big Pharm bought govt. and stopped stem cell research. For now. They think that their friends in Israel can take it over, and the chip business, and no, that's not anti-semitic, it's just one of the things happening in the industry, and Pfizer and Merck are licking their lips trying to figure out how to take over the industry.

So, nuff said. I'm just sick of these extremely tired arguments. Like the WMD nonsense. Just move on.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 10, 2008 5:12 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

stem cell research was never stopped.

You really do sound like a pompous - not - know -a - damn - thing - it - all.

Stop wasting our time here.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE