Posted on 05/02/2005 9:45:13 PM PDT by Founding Father
No. I interpreted the word donor to mean an abortion clinic could be a donor of sorts -- maybe that is skewing things. The article was unclear where exactly they got the stem cells. You can take the stem cells of an aborted baby with cornea developed -- because they did not state that the donors were adults.
I also was trying to interpret this at 3AM.
I wish they would have explicitly stated these are not embryonic stem cells and they do use aborted babies as donors.
Stem cells from the patient or a donor are used to redevelop the cornea...
----
No baby needed
"Notice they're "from the donor" and not a dead baby."
Notice the source of the stem cells is virtually buried in the story.
They didn't want to say "ADULT STEM CELL". The MSM wants to blur the source in these stories so as to push acceptence of killing of the unborn.
Watch this story be edited and altered to serve the embryonic goals that the evil one's have.
>Stem cells from the patient or a donor<
Notice:
NOT EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS!!
While liberal media outlets might well weasel on the source of stem cells by using 'donor' to include murdered, unwilling 'donors', the fact that the article explicitly says 'from the patient' shows that the procedure works with adult stem cells (like all the successful stem cell procedures to date). Autodonation (patient as source) also has the virtue of no chance of tissue rejection and no need for anti-rejection drugs (a point which should be made loudly to everyone who through stupidity or wickedness equates 'stem cells' with 'embryonic stem cells'.)
These are ethical adult stem cells - or they should be, since the patient is the most accessible source.
1: Ophthalmology. 2005 Mar;112(3):470-7.
Outcomes and DNA analysis of ex vivo expanded stem cell allograft for ocular surface reconstruction.
Daya SM, Watson A, Sharpe JR, Giledi O, Rowe A, Martin R, James SE.
Corneo-Plastic Unit, Queen Victoria Hospital, East Grinstead, West Sussex, United Kingdom. sdaya@centreforsight.com
PURPOSE: To investigate the outcome of a new technique of ex vivo expanded stem cell allograft for limbal stem cell deficiency (LSCD), and to characterize the ocular surface genotype after surgery.
DESIGN: Retrospective noncomparative case series.
PARTICIPANTS: Ten eyes of 10 patients with profound LSCD arising from ectodermal dysplasia (3 eyes), Stevens-Johnson syndrome (3 eyes), chemical injury (2 eyes), thermal injury (1 eye), and rosacea blepharoconjunctivitis (1 eye).
INTERVENTION: Allogeneic corneal limbal stem cells were cultured on plastic and transplanted to the recipient eye after removal of conjunctival pannus. Amniotic membrane was applied in a bandage capacity. The procedure was combined with other reconstructive surgery in 2 cases. Nine patients received systemic cyclosporin A immunosuppression, and the DNA genotype was investigated with surface impression cytology.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Parameters of LSCD,
including vascularization, conjunctivalization, inflammation, epithelial defect, photophobia, and pain.
RESULTS: The mean follow-up period was 28 months (range,
12-50). Seven of 10 eyes (70%) had improved parameters of LSCD at final follow-up and were considered successes. Four (40%) had improved visual acuity, including 3 having had further procedures for visual rehabilitation. Three
patients failed to improve-1 with a thermal burn and lid deformity, 1 with Stevens-Johnson syndrome and severe dry eye, and 1 with ectodermal dysplasia who developed an epithelial defect at 26 months. DNA analysis of the first 7 cases showed no ex vivo donor stem cell DNA present beyond 9 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Ex vivo expanded stem cell allograft is a useful technique for restoring the ocular surface in profound LSCD. The absence of donor DNA beyond 9 months suggests that ongoing immunosuppression may be unnecessary and raises questions regarding the origin of the host corneal epithelium.
PMID: 15745776 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
You can do Medline searches at
http://www.ncemi.org/
Go to the left side bar "Medbot searches." It's often easiest to put in the researcher's last name and then first initial, no punctuation. Do a search for relevant pubished articles.
More information on amniotic membrane bandage
"The amniotic membranes used to make the AMCL's come from human placentas obtained immediately following elective cesarean sections at the end of a normal gestation period.""
http://www.wangvisioninstitute.com/Nashville%20Business%20Journal_9_30_02.htm
They might do some research using late term abortions -- which is my biggest concern.
I just wish they would have said adult donors in the article.
But in China, they have been known to kill condemned prisoners in such a way as to exploit the organs for donation (and for a price).
So the term Adult Living Donor would have been nice to clarify things...
It was unclear from the article.
In the past, organizations such as the March of Dimes have funded research to have fetuses born alive for research purposes.
Meant in the kindest way, although blunt: Slow down and think it out next time. "Might" is not right. Everything and anything can be perverted in this fallen world, I agree. But this article and this line of research supports life.
(someone might suggest that you are a candidate for the therapy, if you're not careful!)
FReepmail me if you want on or off my health and science ping list.
N.B. In comment# 27, "Nine patients received systemic cyclosporin A immunosuppression", i.e. an anti-rejection drug because of a foreign body transplant.
But look at the conclusion - there is no foreign DNA in some after 9 months, and it appears that the new cells are autologous.
MMMMM-could it be that the native stem cells are activated/recruited?
Interesting stem cell ping, if you didn't read it already.
It's quite an interesting conclusion. I was only trying to emphasize the fact that an anti-rejection drug was used because it was thought to be necessary for a foreign body transplant, i.e. allografts.
bttt
Sorry. I really should slow down and use the brain for thinking, and not just rant.
Sorry for my awful posting here. I hope you will accept my apology -- good luck with your eyesight.
I hope you will accept my apology.
I misread what this was about.
Once again my sincere apology.
Maybe there is a positive side that people will read it, and see that adult stem cells or patient stem cells are the way to go, and stop harming itty bitty babies.
Once again, a sincere apology.
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.