NationStates Jolt Archive

Hey, this is pretty sweet. One story is about a brazilian woman who can walk and talk again. The other is about a woman who lost the ability to walk 20 years ago, and can now walk again. Stem cell technology still needs a ton of research, but it looks promising so far.

Brazilian Woman (http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?ID=34143)
Korean Woman (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1530&u=/afp/20041128/wl_asia_afp/health_stemcell_paralysis_skorea&printer=1)

And of course, I'd like to add "say no to crazy religious people who don't want stem cell research" because I'm a petty petty man. I still remember how president bush was trying to get a global ban on it, that moron.

This is truly good news, for both stem cell research (and more importantly) those two women

I am happy for these women, but let's not jump to conclusions too quickly.

The first case was a treatment very soon after injury. Without hundreds of studies, and comparable controls, we cannot even state that the treatment helped and that she wouldn't have regained function all onher own - it happens in many nervous system injuries.

In the second case, it does seem very promising. However, we cannot say anything definitive until she dies and (hopefully) has an autopsy. Chances are that these cells became astrocytes and other such "helper" cells which simply aided the neurons she still had left (as has happened in other similar models). Therefore, the claim that this will do away with embryonic stem cell research is incredibly premature, as there is *no* evidence that cord blood cells can become actual functional neurons.

I really wish the media would just shut up and wait for the science to work itself out.

I am happy for these women, but let's not jump to conclusions too quickly.

The first case was a treatment very soon after injury. Without hundreds of studies, and comparable controls, we cannot even state that the treatment helped and that she wouldn't have regained function all onher own - it happens in many nervous system injuries.

In the second case, it does seem very promising. However, we cannot say anything definitive until she dies and (hopefully) has an autopsy. Chances are that these cells became astrocytes and other such "helper" cells which simply aided the neurons she still had left (as has happened in other similar models). Therefore, the claim that this will do away with embryonic stem cell research is incredibly premature, as there is *no* evidence that cord blood cells can become actual functional neurons.

I really wish the media would just shut up and wait for the science to work itself out.

Yea, I thought about that too. But I want to believe that this can work. I don't know when stem cell technology fully matures, but if this is an example of what we can achieve, then I hope the best of luck to them.

wow that is so amazing!

I hope that stem cell treatments in the future are as effective as these seem to have been.

:)

Dubious sources

Yea, I thought about that too. But I want to believe that this can work. I don't know when stem cell technology fully matures, but if this is an example of what we can achieve, then I hope the best of luck to them.

Considering that my thesis is stem cell research, I hope it works too. =) I just know that half of the "argument" against it is this "it hasn't helped anyone yet BS" which basically comes from the media overhyping things long before science has fully researched it.

Did anyone ever see that horizon where a blind man had part of his tooth implanted in his eye to bring back his vision? or did i dream that

A good sign. All those against it are starting to run out of excuses besides "They're human beings (stem cells)", which is tired and recycled.

Therefore, the claim that this will do away with embryonic stem cell research is incredibly premature, as there is *no* evidence that cord blood cells can become actual functional neurons.

I really wish the media would just shut up and wait for the science to work itself out.
Thank you. Although I like that there is scientific reporting going on--people need to know what's happening int he science world--they need to stop jumping to conclusions and thinking that we will soon have armies of human clones and other such nonsense. They also need to stop saying that embryonic stem cell research is not needed, as all of it can be done with umbilical chords and adult stem cells. That's bullsh*t.

Dubious sources

Yahoo news? Oh wait, I just answered my own question! ^.^

This is indeed good news. Soon, when the public realizes how much good can come of this, they'll prevent any laws banning it.

Thank you. Although I like that there is scientific reporting going on--people need to know what's happening int he science world--they need to stop jumping to conclusions and thinking that we will soon have armies of human clones and other such nonsense. They also need to stop saying that embryonic stem cell research is not needed, as all of it can be done with umbilical chords and adult stem cells. That's bullsh*t.
Adult stem cells are useful for blood and bone tissue replacements, but what are the umbilical stem cells useful for? I mean, are they like embryonic stem cells, able to form any cell? or are they like adult stem cells, with limited capacity for change?

This is indeed good news. Soon, when the public realizes how much good can come of this, they'll prevent any laws banning it.
Not the "BUT YOU'RE MURDERING FŒTAL OR EMBRYONIC HUMAN LIFE!" and the mindset that killing a life to save a life is relative to stem cell research will not give in. You can give them as much evidence to the contrary, but they'll still be pseudo-moral asses.

Adult stem cells are useful for blood and bone tissue replacements, but what are the umbilical stem cells useful for? I mean, are they like embryonic stem cells, able to form any cell? or are they like adult stem cells, with limited capacity for change?

Option number two.

Not the "BUT YOU'RE MURDERING FŒTAL OR EMBRYONIC HUMAN LIFE!" and the mindset that killing a life to save a life is relative to stem cell research will not give in. You can give them as much evidence to the contrary, but they'll still be pseudo-moral asses.

Yea, good point.

Hey, this is pretty sweet. One story is about a brazilian woman who can walk and talk again. The other is about a woman who lost the ability to walk 20 years ago, and can now walk again. Stem cell technology still needs a ton of research, but it looks promising so far.

Brazilian Woman (http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?ID=34143)
Korean Woman (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1530&u=/afp/20041128/wl_asia_afp/health_stemcell_paralysis_skorea&printer=1)

And of course, I'd like to add "say no to crazy religious people who don't want stem cell research" because I'm a petty petty man. I still remember how president bush was trying to get a global ban on it, that moron.
Who's a moron? The President's request was to get a global ban on CLONING FETUSES FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING RESEARCH ON THEM!

Hellloohhh!

Hey, this is pretty sweet. One story is about a brazilian woman who can walk and talk again. The other is about a woman who lost the ability to walk 20 years ago, and can now walk again. Stem cell technology still needs a ton of research, but it looks promising so far.

Brazilian Woman (http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?ID=34143)
Korean Woman (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1530&u=/afp/20041128/wl_asia_afp/health_stemcell_paralysis_skorea&printer=1)

And of course, I'd like to add "say no to crazy religious people who don't want stem cell research" because I'm a petty petty man. I still remember how president bush was trying to get a global ban on it, that moron.
Stemcells, you little stemcells lalalalalala

Option number two.
Well, then, embryonic stem cell research is still needed, because you can't help people with anything other than blood or bone disease/cancer

Adult stem cells are useful for blood and bone tissue replacements, but what are the umbilical stem cells useful for? I mean, are they like embryonic stem cells, able to form any cell? or are they like adult stem cells, with limited capacity for change?

As I understand it, (and I really have a better understanding of the extremes at this point - umbilical cord cells have very little research done on them at this point) umbilical cord blood cells are kind of in between. They are not totipotent, like embryonic stem cells - nor are they as easy to maintain long term. However, they are more multipotent than adult stem cells (being less differentiated).

To my knowledge, no actual functional neurons have been differentiated from cord blood cells and the few reports of adult stem cells forming them have been shown to be cell fusion rather than differentiation. Only embryonic stem cells or neural precursors removed from fetuses (which has only been done in animals) have actually formed neurons.