Embryonic Stem Cells Cure Nothing

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=517870

Bioethics: Five years after a budget-busting $3 billion was allocated to embryonic stem cell research, there have been no cures, no therapies and little progress. So supporters are embracing research they once opposed.

California’s Proposition 71 was intended to create a $3 billion West Coast counterpart to the National Institutes of Health, empowered to go where the NIH could not â?? either because of federal policy or funding restraints on biomedical research centered on human embryonic stem cells.

Supporters of the California Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative, passed in 2004, held out hopes of imminent medical miracles that were being held up only by President Bush’s policy of not allowing federal funding of embryonic stem cell research (ESCR) beyond existing stem cell lines and which involved the destruction of embryos created for that purpose.

Five years later, ESCR has failed to deliver and backers of Prop 71 are admitting failure. The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, the state agency created to, as some have put it, restore science to its rightful place, is diverting funds from ESCR to research that has produced actual therapies and treatments: adult stem cell research. It not only has treated real people with real results; it also does not come with the moral baggage ESCR does.

To us, this is a classic bait-and-switch, an attempt to snatch success from the jaws of failure and take credit for discoveries and advances achieved by research Prop. 71 supporters once cavalierly dismissed. We have noted how over the years that when funding was needed, the phrase “embryonic stem cells” was used. When actual progress was discussed, the word “embryonic” was dropped because ESCR never got out of the lab.

Prop 71 had a 10-year mandate and by 2008, as miracle cures looked increasingly unlikely, a director was hired for the agency with a track record of bringing discoveries from the lab to the clinic. “If we went 10 years and had no clinical treatments, it would be a failure,” says the institute’s director, Alan Trounson, a stem cell pioneer from Australia. “We need to demonstrate that we are starting a whole new medical revolution.”

The institute is attempting to do that by funding adult stem cell research. Nearly $230 million was handed out this past October to 14 research teams. Notably, only four of those projects involve embryonic stem cells.

Among the recipients, the Los Angeles Times reports, is a group from UCLA and Children’s Hospital in Los Angeles that hopes to cure patients with sickle cell disease by genetically modifying their own blood-forming stem cells to produce healthy red blood cells. Researchers at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center will use their grant to research injecting heart-attack patients with concentrated amounts of their own cardiac stem cells that naturally repair heart tissue.

Dr. Bernadine Healy, director of the National Institutes of Health under Bush 41, wrote in her U.S. News & World Report column recently that “embryonic stem cells, once thought to hold the cure for Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and diabetes, are obsolete.”

Even worse, they can be dangerous. They are difficult to control, to coax into the specific type of tissue desired. Unlike adult stem cells taken from a patient’s own body, ES cells require the heavy use of immunosuppressive drugs. Their use can lead to a form of tumor called a teratoma.

Real promise is held in what are called induced pluripotent stem cells. In 2006, researchers led by Dr. Shinya Yamanaka of Japan’s Kyoto University were first able to “reprogram” human skin cells to behave like embryonic stem cells. They can do everything stem cells from destroyed embryos can do.

The National Institutes of Health has said that this type of stem cell offers the prospect of having a renewable source of replacement cells and tissues to treat diseases like Parkinson’s and Alzhei-mer’s, spinal cord injury, stroke, burns, heart disease, diabetes, osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis, to name a few.

It is ESCR researchers who have politicized science and stood in the way of real progress. We are pleased to see California researchers beginning to put science in its rightful place.

This is another example of how interests of scientists who have gotten their careers onto a given track can result in them demanding, and getting, huge amounts of money from the government by tying it to emotion or partisan-soaked viewpoints.

(AGW is of course another.)

In this case, it was obvious to anyone with reasonable education in biology that embryonic stem cell therapies were inherently stuck with being inferior to adult stem cell therapies because the latter produces cells with your own identical DNA, while the first inevitably results in introducing cells with foreign DNA, which causes problems.

But, to scientists whose careers had gotten on the embryonic track, what with partisan-soaked or opposed-to-religious-people feelings being out there, all that had to be done was to have the appropriate politicians play that tune, and billions of taxpayer dollars became theirs to play with.

It’s too much to expect all scientists who have embarked on a given track of research to honestly admit that it’s a fairly useless track and grant money ought to go elsewhere. There will, sadly, always be the whores who will tell any lie to get the grant money, and there will always be the pimps in Congress who will set up the taxpayer to shell out the money.

Or in this case, in the California state legislature.

So what is the solution? Is there a way to provide funding for good research while weeding out the bullshit? Some high and mighty panel of scientists? Obviously politicians are fucking retarded when it comes to most things scientific. So I guess a panel of scientists is better than a panel of politicians right?

V

[quote]Vegita wrote:
So what is the solution? Is there a way to provide funding for good research while weeding out the bullshit? Some high and mighty panel of scientists? Obviously politicians are fucking retarded when it comes to most things scientific. So I guess a panel of scientists is better than a panel of politicians right?

V[/quote]

Why not let the free market deal with it? What we are seeing here is the reason why you don’t give government funds for research.

[quote]Vegita wrote:
So what is the solution? Is there a way to provide funding for good research while weeding out the bullshit? Some high and mighty panel of scientists? Obviously politicians are fucking retarded when it comes to most things scientific. So I guess a panel of scientists is better than a panel of politicians right?

V[/quote]

If you build it, they will come.

Meaning, committees attract politicians like shit attracts flies.

Does it matter whether those politicians also have a degree or not?

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]Vegita wrote:
So what is the solution? Is there a way to provide funding for good research while weeding out the bullshit? Some high and mighty panel of scientists? Obviously politicians are fucking retarded when it comes to most things scientific. So I guess a panel of scientists is better than a panel of politicians right?

V[/quote]

Why not let the free market deal with it? What we are seeing here is the reason why you don’t give government funds for research.[/quote]
Exactly. If the shit worked, biotech companies would be all over it.

[quote]HG Thrower wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]Vegita wrote:
So what is the solution? Is there a way to provide funding for good research while weeding out the bullshit? Some high and mighty panel of scientists? Obviously politicians are fucking retarded when it comes to most things scientific. So I guess a panel of scientists is better than a panel of politicians right?

V[/quote]

Why not let the free market deal with it? What we are seeing here is the reason why you don’t give government funds for research.[/quote]
Exactly. If the shit worked, biotech companies would be all over it.[/quote]
I’m going to play devil’s advocate here. To find out if embryonic stem cells actually work in the first place, how does one get money to do the research (in a free market economy)? Companies wouldn’t be all over it at this point because the research hasn’t been done yet. Just wait for someone with enough money from other sources to actually make a breakthrough?

Hmm, I wonder how any pharmaceutical drug, or any invention of any sort, ever gets financed in a free-market economy, since there’s always some point at which the research hasn’t been done yet.

What company in their right mind would sponsor research which could lead to new products in 20-30 years time?

Companies fund technology and engineering projects. These are the application of science. If you want the potential for new technologies in the future someone has to pay for new science. We also have to accept that not everything is going to work! If we knew the answers already we wouldn’t have to do research.

I suggest that any opponents of curiosity driven government funded research should start to refuse accepting medical treatments which have resulted from such research. We could do an interesting statistical study on how much it decreases their life expectancy…

You might then realise that there is more to progress than just economic growth (although it’s clearly a component).

We’ve had this topic come up before and no one has ever tried to explain to me how the free market to going to fund curiosity driven reseach. Or indeed continued the arguement. (Bill Roberts need not reply to me unless he actually reads my post beyond the first paragraph this time)

[quote]PB Andy wrote:

[quote]HG Thrower wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]Vegita wrote:
So what is the solution? Is there a way to provide funding for good research while weeding out the bullshit? Some high and mighty panel of scientists? Obviously politicians are fucking retarded when it comes to most things scientific. So I guess a panel of scientists is better than a panel of politicians right?

V[/quote]

Why not let the free market deal with it? What we are seeing here is the reason why you don’t give government funds for research.[/quote]
Exactly. If the shit worked, biotech companies would be all over it.[/quote]
I’m going to play devil’s advocate here. To find out if embryonic stem cells actually work in the first place, how does one get money to do the research (in a free market economy)? Companies wouldn’t be all over it at this point because the research hasn’t been done yet. Just wait for someone with enough money from other sources to actually make a breakthrough?[/quote]

According to the article they have been researching for 5 years in CA. Now embryonic stem cell research has been going on for a decade now with out shit to show for it. Bush didn’t ban embryonic stem cell research, he banned new embryos from being created for the purpose of research. The research hasn’t yielded jack shit.
Now I am not against embryonic stem cell research provided the embryos were gotten by means in which it could not survive otherwise. For instance, ectopic pregnancies or miscarriages. Rare to get them, yes, but not impossible.
But alas, if they do not yield results soon, the practice needs to stop. Beating a dead horse, that is morally questionable, just to piss off pro-lifers is stupid.

[quote]PB Andy wrote:

[quote]HG Thrower wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]Vegita wrote:
So what is the solution? Is there a way to provide funding for good research while weeding out the bullshit? Some high and mighty panel of scientists? Obviously politicians are fucking retarded when it comes to most things scientific. So I guess a panel of scientists is better than a panel of politicians right?

V[/quote]

Why not let the free market deal with it? What we are seeing here is the reason why you don’t give government funds for research.[/quote]
Exactly. If the shit worked, biotech companies would be all over it.[/quote]
I’m going to play devil’s advocate here. To find out if embryonic stem cells actually work in the first place, how does one get money to do the research (in a free market economy)? Companies wouldn’t be all over it at this point because the research hasn’t been done yet. Just wait for someone with enough money from other sources to actually make a breakthrough?[/quote]

Successful biotech companies (genentech, etc.) have HUGE research budgets for just this sort of thing. They get the money from their successful products. I’m quite sure there are more failures than successes in these labs, but that is part of the cost of products such as pharmaceuticals.

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]Vegita wrote:
So what is the solution? Is there a way to provide funding for good research while weeding out the bullshit? Some high and mighty panel of scientists? Obviously politicians are fucking retarded when it comes to most things scientific. So I guess a panel of scientists is better than a panel of politicians right?

V[/quote]

Why not let the free market deal with it? What we are seeing here is the reason why you don’t give government funds for research.[/quote]

Couldn’t this logic be applied to several other areas as well?

[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]Vegita wrote:
So what is the solution? Is there a way to provide funding for good research while weeding out the bullshit? Some high and mighty panel of scientists? Obviously politicians are fucking retarded when it comes to most things scientific. So I guess a panel of scientists is better than a panel of politicians right?

V[/quote]

Why not let the free market deal with it? What we are seeing here is the reason why you don’t give government funds for research.[/quote]

Couldn’t this logic be applied to several other areas as well?[/quote]

It could be applied to almost all other areas.

[quote]pat wrote:
Beating a dead horse, that is morally questionable, just to piss off pro-lifers is stupid.[/quote]

While it would be impossible to know for a fact, I expect that the Californians who voted to spend billions on embryonic stem cell research were gleefully thinking to themselves, “Boy we’re going to show those Bible-thumpers and Repugnicans how stupid they are!!!” with that dream likely being a major motivation for their votes.

Stem Cells and Diseases

The Promise of Stem Cells

Studying stem cells will help us understand how they transform into the dazzling array of specialized cells that make us what we are. Some of the most serious medical conditions, such as cancer and birth defects, are due to problems that occur somewhere in this process. A better understanding of normal cell development will allow us to understand and perhaps correct the errors that cause these medical conditions.

Another potential application of stem cells is making cells and tissues for medical therapies. Today, donated organs and tissues are often used to replace those that are diseased or destroyed. Unfortunately, the number of people needing a transplant far exceeds the number of organs available for transplantation. Pluripotent stem cells offer the possibility of a renewable source of replacement cells and tissues to treat a myriad of diseases, conditions, and disabilities including Parkinson’s disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, spinal cord injury, burns, heart disease, diabetes, and arthritis.

Have human embryonic stem cells successfully treated any human diseases?

Scientists have been able to do experiments with human embryonic stem cells (hESC) only since 1998, when a group led by Dr. James Thomson at the University of Wisconsin developed a technique to isolate and grow the cells. Although hESC are thought to offer potential cures and therapies for many devastating diseases, research using them is still in its early stages.

In late January 2009, the California-based company Geron received FDA clearance to begin the first human clinical trial of cells derived from human embryonic stem cells.

* Read the Geron press release

Adult stem cells, such as blood-forming stem cells in bone marrow (called hematopoietic stem cells, or HSCs), are currently the only type of stem cell commonly used to treat human diseases. Doctors have been transferring HSCs in bone marrow transplants for over 40 years, and advances in techniques of collecting, or “harvesting” HSCs have been made. HSCs are used to reconstitute the immune system after leukemia, lymphoma or various blood or autoimmune disorders have been treated with chemotherapy.

The clinical potential of adult stem cells has also been demonstrated in the treatment of other human diseases that include diabetes and advanced kidney cancer. However, these newer uses have involved studies with a very limited number of patients.

Participating in Research Studies

Scientists are testing the abilities of adult stem cells to treat certain diseases. You can search for clinical trials using stem cells (or other methods) to treat a specific disease at ClinicalTrials.gov.

http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/health.asp

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Beating a dead horse, that is morally questionable, just to piss off pro-lifers is stupid.[/quote]

While it would be impossible to know for a fact, I expect that the Californians who voted to spend billions on embryonic stem cell research were gleefully thinking to themselves, “Boy we’re going to show those Bible-thumpers and Repugnicans how stupid they are!!!” with that dream likely being a major motivation for their votes.[/quote]

I don’t think they were thinking that at the time, but to continue the practice with no results would just be to piss somebody off.

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Stem Cells and Diseases

The Promise of Stem Cells

Studying stem cells will help us understand how they transform into the dazzling array of specialized cells that make us what we are. Some of the most serious medical conditions, such as cancer and birth defects, are due to problems that occur somewhere in this process. A better understanding of normal cell development will allow us to understand and perhaps correct the errors that cause these medical conditions.

Another potential application of stem cells is making cells and tissues for medical therapies. Today, donated organs and tissues are often used to replace those that are diseased or destroyed. Unfortunately, the number of people needing a transplant far exceeds the number of organs available for transplantation. Pluripotent stem cells offer the possibility of a renewable source of replacement cells and tissues to treat a myriad of diseases, conditions, and disabilities including Parkinson’s disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, spinal cord injury, burns, heart disease, diabetes, and arthritis.

Have human embryonic stem cells successfully treated any human diseases?

Scientists have been able to do experiments with human embryonic stem cells (hESC) only since 1998, when a group led by Dr. James Thomson at the University of Wisconsin developed a technique to isolate and grow the cells. Although hESC are thought to offer potential cures and therapies for many devastating diseases, research using them is still in its early stages.

In late January 2009, the California-based company Geron received FDA clearance to begin the first human clinical trial of cells derived from human embryonic stem cells.

* Read the Geron press release

Adult stem cells, such as blood-forming stem cells in bone marrow (called hematopoietic stem cells, or HSCs), are currently the only type of stem cell commonly used to treat human diseases. Doctors have been transferring HSCs in bone marrow transplants for over 40 years, and advances in techniques of collecting, or “harvesting” HSCs have been made. HSCs are used to reconstitute the immune system after leukemia, lymphoma or various blood or autoimmune disorders have been treated with chemotherapy.

The clinical potential of adult stem cells has also been demonstrated in the treatment of other human diseases that include diabetes and advanced kidney cancer. However, these newer uses have involved studies with a very limited number of patients.

Participating in Research Studies

Scientists are testing the abilities of adult stem cells to treat certain diseases. You can search for clinical trials using stem cells (or other methods) to treat a specific disease at ClinicalTrials.gov.

http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/health.asp[/quote]

Which confirms that 12 years of embryonic stem cell research hasn’t yielded dick.

[quote]pat wrote:
Which confirms that 12 years of embryonic stem cell research hasn’t yielded dick.[/quote]

Oh I’m sorry, you’re a stem cell researcher? You know exactly how far the knowledge pertaining to therapeutic use of stem cells is?

We’re dealing with microscopic cells here, and you see I expect things to move a bit slower because of that.

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Which confirms that 12 years of embryonic stem cell research hasn’t yielded dick.[/quote]

Oh I’m sorry, you’re a stem cell researcher? You know exactly how far the knowledge pertaining to therapeutic use of stem cells is?

We’re dealing with microscopic cells here, and you see I expect things to move a bit slower because of that.[/quote]

The size of the cell is irrelevant. Ignorant statement at best. But then again, you were not trying to contribute anything, were you.
Being hateful and insulting does not make you look strong.
It shows you to be weak.