Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Source of Stem Cells: Amniotic Fluid
Scientific American ^ | January 07, 2007 | Nikhil Swaminathan

Posted on 01/08/2007 5:44:49 PM PST by neverdem

Scientists isolate and culture stem cells from placenta with characteristics of both embryonic and adult stem cells

After seven years of toiling, scientists at the Wake Forest University School of Medicine and Harvard School of Medicine report they have isolated stem cells from a new source: amniotic fluid. The researchers not only succeeded in separating the progenitor cells from the many cells residing in the watery fluid in the placenta surrounding an embryo, but were also able to coax the cells to differentiate into muscle, bone, fat, blood vessel, liver and nerve cells.

According to lead author Anthony Atala, director of Wake Forest's Institute of Regenerative Medicine, 99 percent of the U.S., population could conceivably find genetic matches for tissue regeneration or engineered organs from just 100,000 amniotic fluid samples. In its research, the team isolated stem cells via amniocentesis--a common procedure performed about 16 weeks into pregnancy during which amniotic fluid is drawn to test for genetic disorders in a fetus--as well as from the placenta after birth. The researchers write in their paper--published in this week's Nature Biotechnology--that stem cells make up 1 percent of all the cells in amniotic fluid samples.

"It's been known for decades that there are cells in amniotic fluid," Atala says. "The embryo is constantly shedding all these cells, as it's developing, to the amniotic fluid. The baby's actually breathing in, swallowing the fluid, and it's all coming out through all the pores and gets trapped in the placenta."

After isolating the cells, Atala and his team introduced growth factors to different cell lines in an attempt to assess their potency. They were able to get the amniotic fluid-derived stem (AFS) cells, to transform into many different types of tissue found in fat, blood vessels, liver, muscles and bone as well as the central nervous system. This range comprises all three embryonic germ layers: the mesoderm, the progenitor of bone, muscle and connective tissue; the endoderm, which develops into digestive organs as well as the lungs; and ectoderm, which becomes nerves, skin and the brain. In addition to laboratory experiments, the team studied AFS cells in mouse models, grafting neural stem cells into the brains of mutant mice with disrupted neural development and growing bone tissue in another set of immunodeficient mice.

"It adds to the list of pluripotent stem cells that have already been identified in other sources and tissues," says Willem Fibbe, an immunohematologist at Leiden University Medical Center in the Netherlands. "If these cells have this potential, what would be the specific reason to prefer amniotic fluid-derived cells over the umbilical-cord-derived cells, over the [fat-] tissue-derived cells and the bone-marrow-derived cells?"

Atala says that compared with other types of pluripotent stem cells--save embryonic stem cells--AFS cells are "truly pluripotent" and that their major advantage is that after two weeks of culturing they expand quickly, doubling every 36 hours so that they are in large supply. When compared with embryonic stem cells, AFS cells have two main advantages: First, no embryo needs to be harmed in harvesting the cells, sidestepping a major, hot-button political issue. Also, as Atala points out, AFS cells will not form tumor cells, as the considerably more raw embryo-derived cells can.

"They're not as early and they're not as wild," he explains. "The cells are further along the line of development--and you don't see fetuses developing tumors--so these cells are much more controlled." Atala adds that the AFS cells lie between embryonic and adult stem cells in that the former expand quickly, but can develop into tumors, whereas the latter will not become cancerous, but grow exceedingly slowly.

"The new paper by Atala's group is indeed a breakthrough in demonstrating such a high potential for therapy of a specific set of stem cells in amniotic fluid," observes Markus Hengstschläger, a geneticist at the University of Vienna who is part of the group that, in 2003, first identified the presence of stem cells in amniotic fluid. "It is always a very important question to determine the real potential of such cells."

Going forward, Atala plans to study therapeutic uses for the AFS cells as well as attempt to coax them to differentiate into the tissue found in the heart, pancreas and kidneys. "We still don't know what the benefits are of all these cells--all cells have their strengths," Atala says, referring to all different stem cell types. "We need to keep studying all these different cell types to see what works best for each application at the end."


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events; Technical
KEYWORDS: afscells; afstemcells; stemcells

Image: IMAGE COURTESY OF WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY BAPTIST MEDICAL CENTER
STEM CELLS WITHIN: Scientists have discovered that stem cells derived from amniotic fluid are pluripotent, able to divide into many of the types of cells that make up the human body's tissues.
Isolation of amniotic stem cell lines with potential for therapy (abstract)

Stem cells capable of differentiating to multiple lineages may be valuable for therapy. We report the isolation of human and rodent amniotic fluid–derived stem (AFS) cells that express embryonic and adult stem cell markers. Undifferentiated AFS cells expand extensively without feeders, double in 36 h and are not tumorigenic. Lines maintained for over 250 population doublings retained long telomeres and a normal karyotype. AFS cells are broadly multipotent. Clonal human lines verified by retroviral marking were induced to differentiate into cell types representing each embryonic germ layer, including cells of adipogenic, osteogenic, myogenic, endothelial, neuronal and hepatic lineages. Examples of differentiated cells derived from human AFS cells and displaying specialized functions include neuronal lineage cells secreting the neurotransmitter L-glutamate or expressing G-protein-gated inwardly rectifying potassium channels, hepatic lineage cells producing urea, and osteogenic lineage cells forming tissue-engineered bone.

Go to the link if you're interested in the references which are linked.

1 posted on 01/08/2007 5:44:50 PM PST by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Coleus; Peach; airborne; Asphalt; Dr. Scarpetta; I'm ALL Right!; StAnDeliver; ovrtaxt; ...

SC Ping


2 posted on 01/08/2007 5:46:16 PM PST by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

NARAL is deeply saddened.


3 posted on 01/08/2007 5:58:59 PM PST by Arm_Bears (See Rock City!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; afraidfortherepublic; Alas; al_c; american colleen; annalex; ...
Adult stem-cell breakthroughs
Amniotic fluid used successfully instead of stem cells
Amniotic Fluid Stem Cells Provide Another ESCR Alternative
Heart Valves Grown From Womb Fluid Cells
The Stem Cell Cover-Up By Michael Fumento

Report: Amniotic Fluid Yields Stem Cells
Researchers say amniotic fluid yields stem cells

Amniotic fluid a promising stem cell source


4 posted on 01/08/2007 6:22:15 PM PST by Coleus (Woe unto him that call evil good and good evil"-- Isaiah 5:20-21)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
The miscarriage rate for amniocentesis is 0.25-0.5% (1 in 200), so it will be interesting to see what position Catholic clergy take. As a Catholic, in my understanding, I suspect they would NOT be in favor of cells derived from an amniocenteses. However, I don't see any problems if the AFS cells are derived from a placenta after-birth, which was the other method of obtaining these cells.

So that would be a positive. However, I don't think this new AFS cell research would satisfy the appetite out there for the use embryonic stem cells (just as adult stem cell research has not). Scientifically, there are difference between all three types of stem cells (adult, embryonic, and amniotic fluid). The AF have properties of both adult and embryonic stem cells, but are closer to embryonic.

So the main thing is not to let the media spin anything...closed down the debate...etc. So us pro-lifers still got to call our representatives and tell 'em to vote NO on HR 3!

5 posted on 01/08/2007 6:24:10 PM PST by right-wingin_It
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: right-wingin_It
I was always against amniocentesis because folks used it for 'search and destroy' missions. I had my last baby at age 37, and NJ required docs to inform women my age that there was a greater danger of birth defects like Down's Syndrome and Spina Bifida. I told my doctor that I wasn't interested in an amnio because I had no interest in killing my baby if it had any birth defects.

I asked him if there were anything he'd need to know prior to the baby's birth, and he said that he would take special precautions during delivery. I asked him if there were any other way to determine if the baby had that condition, and he said that an x-ray would do that, so that's what we did. The baby was fine, and I knew he wouldn't be insistent because he was pro-life.

6 posted on 01/08/2007 7:18:08 PM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I'm of two minds about this. I will have to educate myself.


7 posted on 01/08/2007 7:41:48 PM PST by gridlock (We just got dumped. McCain and Rudy are Rebound Guys. Let's not marry the Rebound Guy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gridlock
I will have to educate myself.

Dorland's Medical Dictionary

I saved it to my favorites.

8 posted on 01/08/2007 8:08:10 PM PST by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Central Scrutiniser

ping


9 posted on 01/08/2007 8:28:21 PM PST by NoCurrentFreeperByThatName (You lie, cheat and steal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: El Gato; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Robert A. Cook, PE; lepton; LadyDoc; jb6; tiamat; PGalt; Dianna; ...
Full fat milk makes you thinner - Swedish study

Who paid for that study? Source affects outcome

FReepmail me if you want on or off my health and science ping list.

10 posted on 01/08/2007 9:44:20 PM PST by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I heard this story today. Wow -- it will surely derail the stem cell votes in Congress. At least, postpone them.


11 posted on 01/08/2007 11:29:12 PM PST by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation; hocndoc; Coleus; LadyDoc
I heard this story today. Wow -- it will surely derail the stem cell votes in Congress. At least, postpone them.

I'm still somewhat awestruck by Dr. Atala's claim of no teratomas, and that banking 100,000 samples of amniotic fluid will provide identical tissue matches for 99 percent of our population needing transplants. Politically, I'd like to see Bush go on the offense.

12 posted on 01/09/2007 12:09:32 AM PST by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Great news! BTTT!


13 posted on 01/09/2007 6:15:01 AM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: right-wingin_It; SuzyQ
I tend to agree with the most conservative of the ethicists, like Leon Kass (Jewish), Paul Ramsey (Methodist), and William E. May (Catholic), that it is unethical to subject a baby to risk unless it is for the benefit of the baby himself.

Thus, amniocentesis to detect abnormalities which would motivate an abortion: NO

Amniocentesis to benefit medical research "in general": NO

Amniocentesis to detect abnormalities which would motivate more specialized care during pregnancy and delivery: YES

The concept of "banking" amnotic fluid whould be, maybe, a gray area. IF the purpose is to bank cells which would later benefit the baby himself in later life, as well as others, it would arguably be a YES; but IF there's a less-risky way of obtaining these cells, without anmiocentesis, e.g. by collecting fluids from the placenta and cord and other afterbirth tissues, then I think one might be morally obliged to wait until you can get the afterbirth cells, without risk to the baby.

I doubt that the Catholic Church will issue any binding statements on this, until the facts concerning risks and benefits are made sufficiently clear by the sceintific/medical authorities.

14 posted on 01/09/2007 8:19:25 AM PST by Mrs. Don-o (L'Chaim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: neverdem; Salvation; SuziQ; Coleus; MHGinTN; cpforlife.org; Mr. Silverback; LadyDoc; PGalt; ...
I bought the article, so FReepmail me with your email address if you want me to send the pdf. I may be slow, today - tons to do - but, I'll get it done by early in the AM.

The methods and results are very clear - and here's the conclusion from the article:
We conclude that the AFS cells are indeed broad-spectrum multipotent (that is, pluripotent) stem cells.

15 posted on 01/09/2007 8:58:39 AM PST by hocndoc (http://www.lifeethics.org/www.lifeethics.org/index.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Pinging to post 15.

The cells are also found in the placenta - so can be harvested without risk to the baby.


16 posted on 01/09/2007 9:00:05 AM PST by hocndoc (http://www.lifeethics.org/www.lifeethics.org/index.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
"Wow -- it will surely derail the stem cell votes in Congress. At least, postpone them." No, the congressional plan is not about protecting embryonic aged humans, it's about funding pets and the democrats now control the flow of legislation so it is ridiculous to believe democrats would slow their pets down from votes ... this will, however, make the President's case for vetoing stronger and that alone might make the democrats pause.
17 posted on 01/09/2007 9:07:58 AM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN; neverdem; Salvation; SuziQ; Coleus; cpforlife.org; Mr. Silverback; LadyDoc; PGalt; ...

I wasn't clear - I've got the pdf of the study. I reviewed and quoted some of it at my blog
http://www.lifeethics.org/www.lifeethics.org/2007/01/pluripotent-amnioticplacental-stem.html


18 posted on 01/09/2007 10:02:57 AM PST by hocndoc (http://www.lifeethics.org/www.lifeethics.org/index.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc

Thanks for the link & your work.


19 posted on 01/09/2007 10:07:50 AM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc

Rush has just played Harry Reid asking the demfriendly media not to run such stories on the eve of a Congressional hearing that might be affected by such reporting.


Seriously, Harry Reid is recorded making that statement.


20 posted on 01/09/2007 10:08:17 AM PST by maica (America will be a hyperpower that's all hype and no power -- if we do not prevail in Iraq)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
I doubt that the Catholic Church will issue any binding statements on this, until the facts concerning risks and benefits are made sufficiently clear by the sceintific/medical authorities.

I agree, especially since this is not designed to harm a baby.

21 posted on 01/09/2007 10:11:10 AM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: maica

I missed it, even though I've been listening while blogging and watching the 80th Texas Legislature open. I can multitask, but I'm afraid that I'm not as good as I used to be.


22 posted on 01/09/2007 10:43:48 AM PST by hocndoc (http://www.lifeethics.org/www.lifeethics.org/index.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc

Rush is trying every way he can to reach the intellects of his listeners regarding embryos being life, and thus the sanctioned killing of embryos is a tenet of the faith of liberalism, which has abortion as its sacrament.

Based on some of the callers questions, I am afraid that this concept of libs protecting abortion is going over their heads.


23 posted on 01/09/2007 11:18:31 AM PST by maica (America will be a hyperpower that's all hype and no power -- if we do not prevail in Iraq)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc

Thank you, hocndoc. This is really good news.


24 posted on 01/09/2007 11:36:20 AM PST by Mrs. Don-o (L'Chaim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: right-wingin_It; SuziQ; hocndoc
SCIENCE NEWS
January 09, 2007
Vatican welcomes new stem cell advance

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - The Vatican on Tuesday welcomed a new way of extracting stem cells that does not use human embryos, calling it a significant advance that could help medical research without going against Roman Catholic beliefs.

Cardinal Javier Lozano Barragan, head of the Vatican's Pontifical Council for Health Pastoral Care, said the discovery showed medicine can progress without destroying human embryos.

U.S. researchers reported on Sunday that stem cells found in the amniotic fluid protecting babies in the womb were nearly as powerful as embryonic stem cells in producing adaptable cells that scientists hope can someday transform medicine.

The Catholic Church and other religious groups have been staunch critics of the most common method of stem cell research, which involves extracting cells from human embryos, because they believe such organisms are humans from the moment of conception.

"I am very glad to see this progress in the field of science for the good of humankind," Barragan told Vatican Radio on Tuesday, noting it did not violate "the life of the donor."

In an interview with the Italian daily La Stampa on Monday, he called the discovery "a very significant and ethically admissible advance" in the search for cells that can create muscle, bone and other cells to replace damaged ones.

Barragan said the Vatican was not opposed to all stem cell research. "The Church is not obscurantist and is always ready to welcome real scientific progress that neither threatens nor manipulates the sources of life," he said.

"Our task as a church is not to oppose the oratory (that is, faith) and the laboratory (or rather, science), nor to transform science into faith," he said.
25 posted on 01/09/2007 1:11:13 PM PST by Mrs. Don-o (L'Chaim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: maica
Rush has just played Harry Reid asking the demfriendly media not to run such stories on the eve of a Congressional hearing that might be affected by such reporting.

Yikes ! The dominant media has probably already thought of it. Wouldn't want to interfere with congress. /s

26 posted on 01/09/2007 1:54:03 PM PST by Freee-dame
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
Barragan said the Vatican was not opposed to all stem cell research. "The Church is not obscurantist and is always ready to welcome real scientific progress that neither threatens nor manipulates the sources of life," he said.

Yep, like I figured!
I like that word, "obscurantist".

27 posted on 01/09/2007 1:58:52 PM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Coleus; nickcarraway; narses; Mr. Silverback; Canticle_of_Deborah; TenthAmendmentChampion; ...
Pro-Life PING

Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.

28 posted on 01/09/2007 2:14:35 PM PST by cpforlife.org (A Catholic Respect Life Curriculum is available at KnightsForLife.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

There goes the Democrats' political football.


29 posted on 01/09/2007 5:16:54 PM PST by Sun (Let your New Year's resolution be to vote for conservatives in the primaries! Happy 2007!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
The concept of "banking" amnotic fluid whould be, maybe, a gray area. IF the purpose is to bank cells which would later benefit the baby himself in later life, as well as others, it would arguably be a YES; but IF there's a less-risky way of obtaining these cells, without anmiocentesis, e.g. by collecting fluids from the placenta and cord and other afterbirth tissues, then I think one might be morally obliged to wait until you can get the afterbirth cells, without risk to the baby.

Hmmm intersting..good point:)

30 posted on 01/09/2007 5:40:54 PM PST by right-wingin_It
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
Since the medical report discussed two methods of obtaining the amnio derived stem cells (amniocentesis and harvesting from placenta after-birth), its hard to say if he is talking about both methods, or the one (placenta). Honestly, the report is very recent, and in the 'headline news,' seems acceptable. However, as I said before, I think once the Vatican has time to study the issue more, they would probably be a NO on the amniocentesis method, but a yes to the placenta after-birth method.

See, once you open the door to the amniocentesis method (with the miscarriage rate of 1 in 200), then your out on that slippery slope, which would then lead to claims that embryonic stem cell research is ok, among others. In fact, I wouldn't doubt that one hope of the anti-life crowd would be for the Vatican to "slip up" on something like this. That's evil for ya.

31 posted on 01/09/2007 5:52:09 PM PST by right-wingin_It
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc; SuziQ

Sorry, I wanted wanted to ping you to #31, my reply to Mrs. Dono's post of the initial Vatican statement in #25.


32 posted on 01/09/2007 5:57:39 PM PST by right-wingin_It
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: All; Coleus; cpforlife.org; Salvation

On January 11, the House will consider a bill to fund
research that requires the killing of human embryos.
Sponsored by Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO), H.R. 3 will
federally fund research on human embryos that supposedly
are "leftover" from in vitro fertilization. Instead of
promoting the adoption of these human embryos, this bill
would require their death.

President Bush is the first president to federally fund
human embryonic stem cell research. He decided that such
research could be funded so long as the cells had been
obtained from embryos on or prior to August 9, 2001. Since
then, the government has funded research on over 22 stem
cell lines. However, the President's policy does not
encourage the further killing of human embryos.

Just as abortion is currently legal, killing human embryos
is completely legal. The debate is about federal funding.
We don't federally fund abortion even though it is legal.
Likewise, we should not force U.S. taxpayers to fund
research that requires the destruction of embryos. Last
July, President Bush vetoed the same bill and the House
upheld the veto. However, H.R. 3 would overturn the Bush
policy and create a direct incentive to create and kill
human embryos for research with your taxes!

==>Please contact
your Representative and let him or her know that you
strongly oppose H.R. 3.

Thank you and God bless you.

from frc.org (e-mail)

TAKE ACTION - call your reps.


33 posted on 01/09/2007 8:01:49 PM PST by Sun (Let your New Year's resolution be to vote for conservatives in the primaries! Happy 2007!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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