Stem Cells Move Into Prime Time

ScienceNOW ^ | 18 June 2012 | Dennis Normile

[neverdem]

Biologists grow human-eye precursor from stem cells

Nature News wrote that they used human embryonic stem cells, IIRC. Maybe something got lost in translation from Japanese.

[Lizavetta]

Please cure type 1 diabetes.

[neverdem]

FReepmail me if you want on or off my stem cell ping list.

[Teacher317]

Hopefully some will recognize the difference between using public tax money to fund the use of stem cells, and simply utilizing stem cells in research. There’s a world of difference between the two for many (most?) people.

[Roger_Wildcat]

Correct word for embryonic stem cell is totipotential stem cell. Which is not being used.

Instead they are using pluripotential stem cell. Pluripetential stem cells are found in our red bone marrow. These stem cells becomes our red blood cells, white blood cells, and platelets.

It is interesting that they revert adult skin cells back to pluripotential stem cells. It would make it alot easier to cure some types of diseases without having to use bone marrow donors.

[AndyTheBear]

Are these Adult or Embryonic? Seems like Adult ones have been in prime time for years and years, and Embryonic ones have been all hype up till now...has Embryonic finally actually produced a benefit for all the hype and Californian tax money?

[MHGinTN]

Placemarker

[AndyTheBear]

Correct word for embryonic stem cell is totipotential stem cell. Which is not being used.

Thank you for clarification. I really wish the press would make the distinction...but of course it would reflect badly on the left's decade old claim that Republicans who did not want to support Embryonic research with tax money were standing in the way of impending miracle cures.

[MHGinTN]

IIRC, the researchers used ‘adult’ skin cells, backed them up to the pluripotent stage found in embryonic development, then differentiated them forward to get the type they wanted.

[SuziQ]

The company has created banks of highly purified neural stem cells that are isolated from adult neural tissue. Injected into rodents, the cells don't form tumors; rather, they migrate through the animals' brains, where they differentiate into various types of neural cells including the cells that create the myelin that protects nerve fibers.

These are stem cells taken from ADULT tissue, not embryonic, so they're not having the issue of tumor growth.

[hocndoc]

It appears that the article is talking about 2 separate trials with RPE from different sources.

I’m looking for an older article that I know I’ve seen, but there’s this one
http://dx.crossref.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0037342

[hocndoc]

Here’s an earlier publication by Takahashi on iPS retinal cells
http://jcs.biologists.org/content/122/17/3169.short

[neverdem]

Thanks for the linka.

Yes it's 2 separate studies. The first used adult cells for the genetically caused myelin deficiency. At first I was saddened to see the use of immunosuppressants until I recalled the genetic deficiency.

The second used IPSC according to ScienceNOW, but Nature News implies embryonic stem cells.

But over the past four years, Sasai has used mouse embryonic stem cells to grow well-organized, three-dimensional cerebral-cortex1, pituitary-gland2 and optic-cup3 tissue. His latest result marks the first time that anyone has managed a similar feat using human cells.

[GBA]

The company has created banks of highly purified neural stem cells that are isolated from adult neural tissue.

Amazing!

[luv2ski]

Research done with adult stem cells has been much more successful than with embryonic. For one thing, malignant tumors were a big problem with embryonic but since it is not your own cells, the problems associated with rejection were also an issue. I once asked the head of a big stem cell research center why some people (politicians) continue to push for embryonic if science has shown unequivocally that adult cells are better. His response was that he thinks they just have too much time invested in the process to admit defeat now.

[make no mistake]

I would like to be on your stem cell ping list.
Thank you Neverdem,

[neverdem]

These are stem cells taken from ADULT tissue, not embryonic, so they're not having the issue of tumor growth.

Masayo Takahashi is mentioned both tn the ScienceNOW story and the Nature News' story linked in comment# 1. The blockquote in comment# 13 is from the Nature News' story. It strongly implies that human embryonic stem cells were used. So I don't know which source got it right. Is it ScienceNOW or Nature News? There's no mention of induced pluripotent stem cells in the Nature News' story.

[AndyTheBear]

Ok the block quote was:

But over the past four years, Sasai has used mouse embryonic stem cells to grow well-organized, three-dimensional cerebral-cortex1, pituitary-gland2 and optic-cup3 tissue. His latest result marks the first time that anyone has managed a similar feat using human cells.

Made sure to say the mouse stem cells were embryonic. Did not make sure to say the human cells were. While I am not a biologist, it seems the other article, is more explicit and technical...moreover the particular type of adult stem cells used had undergone a process to make them similar to embryonic stem cells in some important respects...which would explain the relevancy of mouse embryonic stem cells from the block quote from the less technical article.

[MHGinTN]

IIRC that is the essence of the onfusion. And it should not escape our attention that the ones writing the articles WANT embryos harvested for their body parts and will deceive the public any chance they get to do so. The process of taking an adult cell and essentially reversing the differentiation process until a branching point allow the researcher to take the development of stem cells along a line which is the target has been obfuscated to fit the agenda of the dead souls who demand the sacrificial harvesting of embryos regardless of the ability to reverse the differentiation process then bring it forawrd again along lines desired for therapies.

When I wrote and offered on line that little book on stem cells and cloning back in 2000, I actually had people contacting me to ask questions designed to blur the morality, the right and wrongness. One contacted me via freepmail to ask if the brain were prevented from developing in an embryonic gestation, would I see the harvesting of such an organism's body parts as morally acceptable since the organism could never develop into a human child. The questionaer became insensed that I kept pointing back to the immoral intervention in order to create this 'less than human' fetus for harvesting. I had what purported to be a physician call me from OKlahoma (or was it Nebraska?) and offer a minor correction to my terminology, then start berating me for injecting morality into scientific issues! When I asked if the person I was talking to did therapeutic abortions, he slammed the phone down without answering.

The last ones to realize they are serving the father of lies who is a murderer from the start are the ones being deceived into the service. They will not allow Truth (read the God of the Bible) to threaten their comfy worldview, but that is precisely what The Holy Spirit does in order to bring one to a point of Salvation offered to them.

[AndyTheBear]

When I read about the caller accusing you of injecting morality into a scientific question...I had a flash-back to some politically correct t.v. show or movie or some such...where protagonist is respected as being a moral authority because....after all..."he is a scientist".

But my own layman's perception is that bad morals makes bad science. Not just in questions of medical ethics...but in terms of simple accuracy. I think its a harsh moral challenge to be willing to toss away years of hard work on a theory just because the evidence has turned against it...and then humbly adjust your thinking and carry on...especially when it means giving up the funding that might be politically motivated...and of course risking your career and reputation among other researchers who are less willing to follow the evidence....but thank God for those who were moral enough (as well as bright and hard working enough) to make real progress!