Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

(Not Embryonic)Stem-cell Contact Lenses Cure Blindness in one Month
Gizmodo ^ | 06/03/09 | Adam Frucci

Posted on 06/04/2009 6:20:19 AM PDT by Dutchgirl

Here's something that people with poor or no vision will be excited about: three patients had their sight restored in less than a month by contact lenses cultured with stem cells.

All three patients were blind in one eye. The researchers extracted stem cells from their working eyes, cultured them in contact lenses for 10 days, and gave them to the patients. Within 10 to 14 days of use, the stem cells began recolonizing and repairing the cornea.

Of the three patients, two were legally blind but can now read the big letters on an eye chart, while the third, who could previously read the top few rows of the chart, is now able to pass the vision test for a driver's license. The research team isn't getting over excited, still remaining unsure as to whether the correction will remain stable, but the fact that the three test patients have been enjoying restored sight for the last 18 months is definitely encouraging. The simplicity and low cost of the technique also means that it could be carried out in poorer countries.

This is incredible and potentially game changing. It's stuff like this that makes you realize that we live in the future, and it's awesome. [UNSW via The Australian via GizMag]


TOPICS: Science
KEYWORDS: adultstemcells; blindness; health; medical; medicine; research; stemcell; stemcells
Video at link.
1 posted on 06/04/2009 6:20:19 AM PDT by Dutchgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Dutchgirl

WOW... just... wow.

teeman


2 posted on 06/04/2009 6:23:17 AM PDT by teeman8r
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dutchgirl

Wow, what a great break through!!!


3 posted on 06/04/2009 6:28:33 AM PDT by Dustbunny ("Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them. " Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dutchgirl

This is incredible. I wonder if this just works on certain types of blindness, or on regular near & far-sighted vision? It would seem that it would be only for cases of blindness relating to the cornea, but I would be interested in reading more about this.


4 posted on 06/04/2009 6:31:19 AM PDT by alicewonders
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dutchgirl
May God bless the efforts of adult stem cell researchers. This is truly an amazing article.
5 posted on 06/04/2009 6:34:11 AM PDT by so_real ( "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dutchgirl

I wonder if it corrects simpler issues, like astigmitisms? In other words, bring your eyesight to 20/20?


6 posted on 06/04/2009 6:34:20 AM PDT by theDentist (qwerty ergo typo : i type, therefore i misspelll)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dutchgirl

I’m legally blind....


7 posted on 06/04/2009 6:38:02 AM PDT by cake_crumb (Current Misery Index Approximately 32%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theDentist

Ditto.


8 posted on 06/04/2009 6:40:25 AM PDT by kimmie7 (THE CROSS - Today, Tomorrow and Always!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: kimmie7

Well, I need to have coffee. That ditto was for #5. lol


9 posted on 06/04/2009 6:41:03 AM PDT by kimmie7 (THE CROSS - Today, Tomorrow and Always!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dutchgirl
This is fabulous! Future medical testing, absence of socialized medicine is the only way these types of discoveries can come to fruition. And to think that the stem cells were from the person themselves and not aborted babies! Fantastic!
10 posted on 06/04/2009 6:48:53 AM PDT by classified
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dutchgirl

A couple of years ago adult stem cells saved the eyes of my son. He was losing his vision due to long-term effects of a chemical burn. The stem cells were taken from healthier parts of one eye and transplanted into both eyes. After just a few days (maybe 4), his sight was near normal, better than before the surgery, and after a couple of weeks, his sight was normal. Now a couple of years later you would never guess he had ever been injured.


11 posted on 06/04/2009 6:50:08 AM PDT by Marylander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: so_real; Dutchgirl
May God bless the efforts of adult stem cell researchers. This is truly an amazing article.

Amen to that, and thanks for the thread, Dutchgirl!

Here's another link, same subject, with a link to the journal abstract where the study appeared...

Can Sight Be Restored With Stem Cells Grown on Contact Lenses?

My only beef with the article is that the fact adult stem cells were used isn't acknowledged.

12 posted on 06/04/2009 6:50:30 AM PDT by mewzilla (In politics the middle way is none at all. John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Marylander

son=son-in-law, but he’s like a son to me.


13 posted on 06/04/2009 6:52:27 AM PDT by Marylander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: so_real
Once again, these are not just "adult" stem cell results, they are autologous stem cells, i.e., using the patient's own cells reverted to stem form. This completely avoids histocompatibility issues since it's literally helping the body to heal itself.

Injecting foreign tissues into one's body, be they of adult or embryonic origin, just isn't "natural". It's a measure of how much the abortion agenda has taken control of the MSM-reported debate over stem-cells that the key issue of autologous vs. everything else still goes widely unreported and unnoticed by the general public.

The pro-life movement would do well to focus the real debate on this point rather than characterizing this as embryionic vs. adult stem cells. "We want to help your body heal itself" has no rebuttal. Look at the literature. All of the real stem-cell results involve autologous stems, so there's no need to fall into the abortion trap in debating this issue.

14 posted on 06/04/2009 6:53:41 AM PDT by AustinBill (consequence is what makes our choices real)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Dutchgirl

Save and File


15 posted on 06/04/2009 6:59:41 AM PDT by Rumplemeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rumplemeyer

IF you see a LION at a supermarket. Thank them.


16 posted on 06/04/2009 7:02:03 AM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: AustinBill

Why is the left determined to use embryos? I suspect there is a market for fetal tissue, anybody know what Planned Parenthood does with it? I sent them an email asking, never got a reply.


17 posted on 06/04/2009 7:10:50 AM PDT by beefree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: beefree
Why is the left determined to use embryos?

The answer should be obvious. The "stem cell debate" is just the latest flag of convenience being used to dupe the public into believing that some good will result from evil. By cleverly phrasing the debate as "embryonic" vs. "adult" the debate is steered into the familiar landscape of "choice". The pro-life movement falls into the trap when they argue for "adult" stem cells.

The real argument (for which the left has no response) is to phrase things as "natural" (autologous) vs. "artificial" (foreign tissue) cells.

There really is such a thing as "natural law". This is but one aspect of it.

18 posted on 06/04/2009 7:20:55 AM PDT by AustinBill (consequence is what makes our choices real)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb

Do you think this may be an option for you?


19 posted on 06/04/2009 7:28:08 AM PDT by Dutchgirl ("Every Socialist is a disguised dictator." Ludwig Von Mises)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: AustinBill

Of course you are right! To be technically accurate I, and they, should have used the term “autologous”. However, the battle of the day is to expose the evil, and therefore worthlessness, of pursuing “embryonic” stem cell use. My use the term “adult” was intended to serve that purpose — to make that distinction between the two. As soon as the baby-vs-adult battle is won, I’ll make an effort to keep my adjectives accurate. Thanks!


20 posted on 06/04/2009 10:14:29 AM PDT by so_real ( "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: so_real
Engaging the debate as "embryonic" vs. "adult" misses the whole point. Someone who has no respect for moral values is delighted to see the opposition painted into the corner of making "primitive" moral arguments vs. their "enlightened" scientific views. You just can't win that argument. As a wise theology professor of mine once observed, you cannot reason a man out of a position he has not reasoned himself into.

Turn the tables and recast the debate as "Helping your body heal itself" (the natural way) vs. "Injecting foreign tissues into your body" (the artificial way) and see how things change. Support for autologous stem cells means rejecting embryonic research in a way that plays to the organic "all natural" mindset.

Sometimes a bit of forensic ju-jitsu is called for in the public square.

21 posted on 06/04/2009 10:41:03 AM PDT by AustinBill (consequence is what makes our choices real)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: AustinBill

Interesting. You may well be on to something there. Redefining the argument from “baby cells vs. adult cells” to “my cells vs. foreign cells” will draw even those ignoring their moral compasses into the correct side of the debate. The more self-serving and ego-centric they are, the more vocal an ally they become. For all the wrong reasons, they join the side of right. And “all natural” is a hot ticket right now. You’ve convinced me to try something new. It is a sound logical argument, and may well be a convincing one as well. Thank you.


22 posted on 06/04/2009 11:12:41 AM PDT by so_real ( "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson