SCI/TECH: Tremendous Advance in Stem Cell Science

Researchers in South Korea have developed a new process of "customizing" embryonic stem cells to suit the patient. This new technology breaks just as congress examines the ethical questions of stem cells. The new techniques have the capacity to save countless lives.



More great news in the realm of stem cell science. South Korean researchers obviously broke this news to add more fuel to the "pros" side of the debate, weeks before the issue goes before congress in the U.S.

Stem cell research has the capacity to produce mankind's greatest medical achievments and should continue without any major restrictions in every country.

Related News Links:
www.canoe.ca
msnbc.msn.com
www.forbes.com
www.bloomberg.com

[edit on 19-5-2005 by Zipdot]

I did an op/ed on the stem cell issue a while ago. Still we strive for the holy grail of embryonic stem cell research benefits, while adult stem cell research - which a) doesn't raise the moral questions that embryonic stem cell research does, and b) has produced far more positive results - gets more and more starved for funding and media attention.

Really? Care to show me the studies that have show Adult Stems cells to be more effective? I can go out get get hundreds of studies that point to ebryonic stem cells being the most potent form of Regenerative Medicine to date. I have only seen a few studies that showed at least SOME hope that Adult Cells would be marginally effective.

The main difference between embryonic cells and adult cells is that embryonic cells are much more viable. They can be manipulated to change into any type of 220 cells in your body, where adult cells have their limitations. Granted, embryonic cells are eveloped by the moral issue, but they are of more use in the medical world. The link you provided actually states:

1. Current scientific evidence indicates that the potential medical benefits of adult stem cells may fall short of those of embryonic cells.

2. The use of embryonic cells is a seperate issue from the "right to life" issue. Abortions and destruction of frozen embryos left over from in-vitro fertilization procedures will continue whether the "material" is used for research or not.

If embryonic cells are just going to be destroyed, why not put them to use? This is something that just doesn't make sense to me. Then again, I look at the possibility... and not the morality.



[edit on 5/20/05 by SupaFly]

Well what about stemcells from the Umbilical Cord, they're the same type aren't they? (Correct me if im wrong though)

I work in stem cell transplant and cord blood is used much more now then ever before. When available, cord blood is the best to use for allogeneic transplants. The problem is that heavier people can not use cord blood because cords are generally smaller in volume, but they provide less side affects compared with adult stem cells post-transplant. One of the biggest side affects of an allogeneic transplant is Graft vs Host Disease. This causes issues ranging from skin eruptions to liver toxicities to chronic diarrhea and even death when severe. Cord blood limits the severity of GvHD.

Supafly, did you also hear of that method some Researchers developed that made Stemcells replicate into more Stemcells? I cannot find the paper right now(it was in BMJ or Nature I forget which)

The problem is that heavier people can not use cord blood because cords are generally smaller in volume,

Yet another reason to get the West to shape up and get fit

[edit on 20-5-2005 by sardion2000]

sardion2000,

I did, bit i can't recall if it was associated with this Korean research or if it came out previously. I read that replicating the cells were a part of this new process, but for some reason I don't think this is anything new. I could be wrong.

It's actually a shame when we have a good cord to use for someone and the first question asked is: how much does the patient weigh? Then when the patient is overweight, the room gives out a collective sigh.

Even more recently, we have started performing Pooled Cord Blood transplants. Multiple cords from different donors.. interesting stuff. We have only performed it on a couple of patients so far so, I can't give any outcomes just yet.

Awesome. An expert in the field. Supafly, please expand more upon your research here, if you have time.

I am by no means an expert (I am not an MD), but if you have specific questions, feel free to ask and I'll do my best to answer.

Edit: spelling

[edit on 5/20/05 by SupaFly]

THe most significant development of this article is not in its headline. The most significant development as concerns the stem cell debate is that the researchers in question here did not use fertilized embrios to do their research. They did not use human beings in their early stage of development to create their stem cell line.

Hwang and his colleagues do not use surplus test-tube embryos to create their stem-cell lines. Instead, they employ a cloning technique known as somatic-cell nuclear transfer. In this process, the nucleus from an unfertilized donor egg cell is replaced with nuclear material from a different kind of cell. Then the egg is processed with electricity and chemicals, coaxing it to grow to the blastocyst stage.

Hello!!! This is not really embrionic stem cell research as the public understands it. There is no fertilized ovum being destroyed here. Instead they are using only the unfertilized ovum to produce stem cells. This further illustrates why it is not neccessary to experiment on true embrios. There is just no need to violate the moral beliefs of a large portion of our population in order to do research that according to the article above can now be done without such offense.

The truly sad result of the article written by msnbc is that they do not trumpet the real development in the story but instead simply try to push their political agenda. If the article above is to be believed then there is no longer a need to debate embrionic stem cell research. With these new ways of extracting stem cells from a cloned ovum the issue should become moot. Instead those who have an agenda to push simply trumpet all the louder how we should allow unrestricted research on preborn human beings rather than affording them the deepest respect. What terrible bias the above article displays via its organization and verbage.

[edit on 20-5-2005 by Johannmon]

I can't believed I missed that in the Original article. That is HUGE!

Me too.. blame it on today being Friday!

Bush found a reason to be against the new Korean research:

from msnbc.com
WASHINGTON - President Bush on Friday said he would veto legislation that would loose restrictions on embryonic stem cell research and expressed concern about human cloning research in South Korea.

“I’m very concerned about cloning,” the president said. “I worry about a world in which cloning becomes accepted.”

White House deputy press secretary Trent Duffy said the work in South Korea amounted to human cloning for the sole purpose of scientific research. “The president is opposed to that,” Duffy said. “That represents exactly what we’re opposed to.”

South Korean researchers, funded by their government, reported producing human embryos through cloning and then extracting their stem cells. It is a major advancement in the quest to grow patients’ own replacement tissue to treat diseases.

If it's not one thing, it's another.

Zip

It's not even fertilized there is NO way for this embro to do anything other then what it was designed to do. Man the people who pull Bush's strings really want Humanity to wallow in misery and suffering don't they. This is Leon Kass' work, I just know it....

[edit on 20-5-2005 by sardion2000]

Clones aren't "fertilized," they just transfer nuclear material into the egg. It's a form of fertalization but it's obviously not "fertilization" in the classical sense. Point being, if these dna-impregnated eggs were allowed to grow, they would become humans.

Zip

[edit on 20-5-2005 by Zipdot]

Originally posted by Zipdot
Clones aren't "fertilized," they just transfer nuclear material into the egg. It's a form of fertalization but it's obviously not "fertilization" in the classical sense. Point being, if these dna-impregnated eggs were allowed to grow, they would become humans.

Zip

NO these types of cells only develop up to the blastocyst stage. I cannot form a human being. They are not fertilizing it in the traditional sense. These scientists purposely left out some genetic material so it wouldn't develop beyond a certain point. Dunno how they'll like that one, but it's not really the same things as Human Cloning.

I cannot wait untill anyone with a moral objection to this magnificent research is pushing up daisies, Its ridiculously selfish to consciously indirectly cause suffering of a fellow human being merely because it interferes with your theological beliefs

This release from SK was done with adult stem cells. Sheesh.

Originally posted by sardion2000
Really? Care to show me the studies that have show Adult Stems cells to be more effective? I can go out get get hundreds of studies that point to ebryonic stem cells being the most potent form of Regenerative Medicine to date. I have only seen a few studies that showed at least SOME hope that Adult Cells would be marginally effective.

So what, in your opinion, is a good reason to oppose anything? Environmentalism, animal rights, those are better reasons to oppose research or progress, at the expense of human lives?

It's odd that theology is an "evil" reason to oppose something, but newer belifs like environemntalism can be used to justify or oppose the same thing.

When hardware technology comes out, so many people point to possible abuses, but seem to think stem cell research should be allowed to do whatever is thought necessary at the time-because it applies to human's hubris and greed. Personal survival and possible immortality, well, do whatever you want to give it to me! Theology and moral considerations are simply roadblocks to be scoffed.

Already this research shows more potential than the splitting of the atom-for good and for evil. But the same folks who condemn any sort of research into better reactors and space propulsion systems for their possibility of abuse, put on the blinders and fail to see those same possibilites here.

I fear these reasearches will also give us biological weapons of terrifying power, and social abuses to cloned individuals that will make the slave trade disgrace of the US (and the decades of discrimination after) seem as a mere hiccup in the history of ignorant institutionalized evil.

Originally posted by Azza
I cannot wait untill anyone with a moral objection to this magnificent research is pushing up daisies, Its ridiculously selfish to consciously indirectly cause suffering of a fellow human being merely because it interferes with your theological beliefs