Embryonic Stem Cells Cure Nothing

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]pat wrote:

[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]

Well, what other areas of science have California voters decided to come up with billions of dollars to support in a special proposition vote?

If they do that all the time, then I’ll grant there wasn’t an unusual factor going on here.

My take on it though is that it was emotion-driven, since I hadn’t thought practicality-driven billions allocated to science by Proposition votes in California was a common practice, unless you do have examples.

And if we grant it was emotion but suppose that perhaps the emotion was something nobler – thinking of lives saved, perhaps – there are a lot of areas where billions of extra dollars will be KNOWN to save a lot of lives. So I just don’t see saving lives as the reason.

22

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
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.[/quote]
You hit the nail on the head, btw great article john s.

23

[quote]pat wrote:

[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]

Well, they have gotten FDA clearance to being the first human clinical trials, but I do understand your frustration. R&D takes a long, long time sometimes, especially when fighting against political winds. Speaking of that, the first clearance for human trials began in January 2009…There was some other political event that happened around that month I think. I wonder if there is any connection… What do you think?

24

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[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]

Well, they have gotten FDA clearance to being the first human clinical trials, but I do understand your frustration. R&D takes a long, long time sometimes, especially when fighting against political winds. Speaking of that, the first clearance for human trials began in January 2009…There was some other political event that happened around that month I think. I wonder if there is any connection… What do you think?
[/quote]

I think they need to move from promise and potential, to tangible results very quickly. There are always going to politics involved but right now there is a super majority of pro-embryonic stem cell research folks in governement. If politics is playing a role in any kind of delay, it’s their own damn fault.

25

[quote]pat wrote:

I think they need to move from promise and potential, to tangible results very quickly. There are always going to politics involved but right now there is a super majority of pro-embryonic stem cell research folks in governement. If politics is playing a role in any kind of delay, it’s their own damn fault.[/quote]

Were they allowed to move “from promise and potential to tangible results very quickly?” Why were the first clearances granted in January 2009? Could there have been results before human clinical trials?

26

Embryonic stem cell research, like gene therapy research, is expensive and takes a long time to make a small advance. Even then, the first implementations could be extremely narrow in use. I’m not advocating the research… i’m just saying results can’t be expected in a relatively short amount of time.

Even though gene therapy research has advanced quite a bit, it is still only applicable to genetic diseases that affect a small number of genes. The more genes that need to be suppressed or augmented, the more variables that need to be accounted for. And the researchers also have to precisely identify the genes responsible. All of this takes a considerable amount of time.

I write this, basically, to call attention to the fact the gene therapy was also marginalized at one point. It is still small in its scope of treatable genetic diseases, but it is making advancements.

27

Can you please tell me one advantage, even theoretical or potential and no matter how small, of using cells derived from embryos (different DNA than yours) rather than from adult stem cells from your own body?

No?

28

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

I think they need to move from promise and potential, to tangible results very quickly. There are always going to politics involved but right now there is a super majority of pro-embryonic stem cell research folks in governement. If politics is playing a role in any kind of delay, it’s their own damn fault.[/quote]

Were they allowed to move “from promise and potential to tangible results very quickly?” Why were the first clearances granted in January 2009? Could there have been results before human clinical trials?
[/quote]

They’ve been working on this shit since 1998 and haven’t come up with shit. That’s a problem.

29

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Can you please tell me one advantage, even theoretical or potential and no matter how small, of using cells derived from embryos (different DNA than yours) rather than from adult stem cells from your own body?

No?[/quote]

Stem Cell Basics

  1. Introduction: What are stem cells, and why are they important?
  2. What are the unique properties of all stem cells?
  3. What are embryonic stem cells?
  4. What are adult stem cells?
  5. What are the similarities and differences between embryonic and adult stem cells?
  6. What are induced pluripotent stem cells?
  7. What are the potential uses of human stem cells and the obstacles that must be overcome before these potential uses will be realized?
  8. Where can I get more information?

V. What are the similarities and differences between embryonic and adult stem cells?

Human embryonic and adult stem cells each have advantages and disadvantages regarding potential use for cell-based regenerative therapies. One major difference between adult and embryonic stem cells is their different abilities in the number and type of differentiated cell types they can become. Embryonic stem cells can become all cell types of the body because they are pluripotent. Adult stem cells are thought to be limited to differentiating into different cell types of their tissue of origin.

Embryonic stem cells can be grown relatively easily in culture. Adult stem cells are rare in mature tissues, so isolating these cells from an adult tissue is challenging, and methods to expand their numbers in cell culture have not yet been worked out. This is an important distinction, as large numbers of cells are needed for stem cell replacement therapies.

Scientists believe that tissues derived from embryonic and adult stem cells may differ in the likelihood of being rejected after transplantation. We don’t yet know whether tissues derived from embryonic stem cells would cause transplant rejection, since the first phase 1 clinical trial testing the safety of cells derived from hESCS has only recently been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Adult stem cells, and tissues derived from them, are currently believed less likely to initiate rejection after transplantation. This is because a patient’s own cells could be expanded in culture, coaxed into assuming a specific cell type (differentiation), and then reintroduced into the patient. The use of adult stem cells and tissues derived from the patient’s own adult stem cells would mean that the cells are less likely to be rejected by the immune system. This represents a significant advantage, as immune rejection can be circumvented only by continuous administration of immunosuppressive drugs, and the drugs themselves may cause deleterious side effects

http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/basics5.asp

Read lots more in the link.

30

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

I think they need to move from promise and potential, to tangible results very quickly. There are always going to politics involved but right now there is a super majority of pro-embryonic stem cell research folks in governement. If politics is playing a role in any kind of delay, it’s their own damn fault.[/quote]

Were they allowed to move “from promise and potential to tangible results very quickly?” Why were the first clearances granted in January 2009? Could there have been results before human clinical trials?
[/quote]

They’ve been working on this shit since 1998 and haven’t come up with shit. That’s a problem.[/quote]

Research isn’t a video game, where if you spend a certain amount of time on something, you level up.
They are discovering new things. Just because it isn’t something applicable or tangible to humans doesn’t mean we aren’t getting somewhere.

31

Um, I notice no one yet has answered my question?

There is a reason for being unable to do so.

32

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Um, I notice no one yet has answered my question?

There is a reason for being unable to do so.[/quote]

???

Two posts up.