Slashdot Mirror
Bone Marrow Can Grow New Brain Cells
ActMatrix writes: "Scientists at Stanford and the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke have demonstrated that stem cells in bone marrow can produce neurons that replace dead brain cells, similar to the way our bodies constantly replenish skin cells. What isn't certain yet is whether these new brain cells make functional neural connections. If they do, it's possible that doctors will some day use marrow transplants to treat brain disorders. What's especially cool is how they discovered this. In one case, mice whose natural bone marrow was killed by radiation were injected in the tail with marrow containing a phosphorescent protein. When the mice were killed later, parts of their brains glowed in the dark. =) Article with some more details from CNN here."
an offtopic post in an open forum! oh the humanity! what ever shall we do?
Body factories where doctors call up Hey guys I need a liver here some of the pateints bone marrow one week ok he has that much time.
Does this mean we can all drink more?? Who cares if they die... they'll grow back!!!
-andy
The main advantage is that this method would avoid having to use fetal cells. That means less reluctance and larger supply.
Parkinsons, perhaps ALheimers, some mental illnesses
are due to chemical absences or imbalances.
This method might be able to help those.
Who the fuck are we to say that we know how we should evolve, when it's been working pretty damn good without our intervention for the past few eons. I would like to say the now cliche "We shouldn't play God," but i shouldn't say that since I don't think there is a God.. I'll instead just say "We shouldn't play Nature."
Newsflash ace: We are part of nature. We're animals and what we instinctively do (make and use tools) is natural. Let's keep in mind that "Nature" isn't trying to better us or keep us alive. Nature doesn't give a shit about the evolution of humanity and natural process may drive us extinct. You say that nature has worked okay so far - true enough, but past performance is no guarantee of future results. Nature has driven plenty of species extinct (dinosaurs anyone) and given our own a few hard knocks (black death).
I'd rather be guiding my own destiny than having nothing guide it.
--Shoeboy
Ok, this humanist crap needs to go. Human beings are animals. Humanity isn't an identity, it's a species.
It's no less moral for a human to eat a pheasant than it is for a hawk to do so. There's no moral difference between change due to evolution and change due to scientific treatments.
I congratulate you on your lack of sentimental religious idiocy, but I wonder how you justify believing in this sort of special pleading for humanity with your logical refusal to believe in god and the tooth fairy.
I know what you're going to say: "But Shoeboy, humanity is special and therefore special pleading is ok." Poppycock! Everything is special if you want to think about it that way. Dogs are special due to thousands of unique attributes that make them different from wolves and Volkswagen Beetles. The Matterhorn is special - there's no other chunk of rock quite like it.
Nature is no more concerned about eroding our precious humanity than it is about eroding the Matterhorn - why should we be any different.
You know what separates natural laws from moral laws? Natural laws are based on reality, moral laws are based on fantasy. Try an expiriment: break the second commandment - now try breaking the 2nd law of thermodynamics. See what I mean?
Good and bad are like up and down - outdated concepts born of ignorance. Just as you can't be sure what up and down mean on a spherical earth, you can never bew sure you're acting morally. The theiving clergy make a fortune of this dillemma.
Do what thou wilt is the whole of the law. The only way to be happy is to do what you feel like doing and be damned to morallity and consequences.
--Shoeboy
C'mon kiss. You usually put some more work into your trolls than that. Since this is really just a cut'n'paste version of your last one, i won't bother shooting it down. It just isn't sporting...
Wow, this is *great* news. Now I can drink all I want and not worry(like I did before) about killing brain cells, since they can be replaced! It's about time Science came up with something *I* can use.
the Germans carried Nietzsche's text like Canadians do the Bible
Woah. Like Canadians do the Bible? When did Canada become so religious? I don't think we're nearly as religious as our American neighbours. We certainly don't have the same amount of "Bible thumpers". Look at the general public reaction to the fact that Stockwell Day is a young-earth creationist.
Of course, there's a lot of variation based on where you are in geography (a la US). Admittedly, I'm from Quebec, where religion took a very sharp nosedive somewhere in 60's. So, I come from the least religious part of the country.
S
-- Will quantum computers run imaginary-time operating systems?
In theory - they could do this...
Back in the late 60's-early 70's Time-Life published a set of books: Time-Life Science series (or some such). Many topics relating to science, both research and applied, were explored (a very fascinating one deals with Water). These books may still be found in used books stores all over.
Photos tended to be the high point of these books - most had the quality of Life magazine photos (I assume because they used the same photographers). In short, these books were of rather high quality.
One particular book in the series dealt with the Brain, discussing a variety of subjects related to this organ: learning, memory, vision - even AI and machine intelligence were discussed. There were photos and captions throughout showing the brain and how it worked (according to 1960's science). One particularly disturbing photo:
A couple of lab monkeys (rhesus, I believe) were being used for experiments regarding the brain (I can't remember what - probably brain activity or stimulus). Under anesthesia, these monkeys had their skulls, just above the browline, sawed completely off, exposing the top half of their brains. In place of the skull, an acrylic "dome" was attached (it looked molded to match the monkey's heads) to the bone "shelf", screwed down with stainless steel screws.
Essentially, the brains of the monkeys became "viewable". I imagine the monkeys were given anti-inflammatory medicine (and possible other pain killers), and probably a healthy dose of antibiotics for infection prevention. At least, I hope they were - though I have wondered whether that would have skewed any results, and whether they were given nothing to help any pain or infection...
I have only seen this picture in that particular book - nowhere else (I speculate that it may have appeared in either a Time or Life magazine of the period, but I have not located such an issue). Nothing was ever said further about the monkeys, such as what was learned or how long they "lived" in that condition.
It is a very macabre picture - disturbing in a primal way. Not an APCA moment, assuredly!
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
or do other people think that mice with glowing brains are cool ? now you need to modify them to be transparant ...
the ultimate geek pet ?
mvg,
Kris "dJOEK" Vandecruys
Exercise caution when modding this message up: the author acts like a jerk when his karma is excellent.
I happen to work with these cells in a reseach lab at Johns Hopkins. Beyond neurons, researchers have claimed these cells can become
- Fat Cells
- Cartilage Cells
- Bone Cells
- Muscle Cells (smooth, skeletal and cardiac)
The ability to produce new caridac muscle cells is also particularly important, as like neurons, they cannot be repaired or naturally replaced in adults. With a reliable source of Cardiac muscle cells heart failure, a disease millions of people develop each year, could possibly be cured.
If you are curious about reading more, try out these urls:
A nice graphical depiction from a biotech company.
An Importance Science Article (Requires account for full text access.)
Additionally,
Osiris Theraputics is a biotech company which is doing work on these cells.
I was born with cerebral palsy due to being born 3 months premature. So my brain, due to this damage sustained by this early birth, doesn't really communicate well with my body. While a have a mild case compared to some, I can walk reasonably well after 5 operations, and have little difficulty otherwise, it would be nice to be "normal". To counter some of the this is evil or unnatural postings. I believe in God, but I believe in man as well. Man has the power to change his surroundings and even himself to a large extent. Science is not inherently evil , but it can be put to evil uses.This research can be used to help millions with real problems. It's all in how you use the knowledge, not the knowledge itself. Things to keep in mind, these are mice, not people and the article says the scientists involved are not sure what this means. Don't view this as an excuse to drink and do drugs with the view that I can replace my brain cells when they are gone.(Yes, I understand these statements are meant as jokes.) Science can't fix everything, though it may someday.
IIRC, one of the reasons lower reptiles can regenerate limbs is because their blood cells still contain DNA in their nucleus. When a frog, for example, loses a limb, the blood cells undifferentiate and then redifferentiate to become bone, nerves, muscle, and skin cells. Absolutely amazing.
Mammal blood cells are "more efficient" and don't contain any DNA, but stem cells are blood cells before they differeniate and lose their DNA so that, in theory, they can redifferentiate into nerve cells! Or bone or muscle or skin! In theory at least.
The most interesting thing is that this book was first published over 20 years ago and it's only now that I've begun reading about using stem cells in medical treatment. I can't help but think, what took them so long?
In all honesty, although it is a fascinating book, the last quarter of it is a rant against the medical research establishment in general and, IMO, detracts from the credibility of the author.
---Disclaimer, I am not a biochemist.
// TODO: fix sig
An injection of marrow derived stem cells into the spine is far more elegant then any bionic solution we could ever develope. (though this is not to say I don't want implant technology to be researched, I've got a shopping list of implants as long as any other geek on
NightHawk
Tyranny =Gov. choosing how much power to give the People.
I mean, why do you need to grow more braincells? And how did they figure out that... errr... How did they... get ummmm.... wait, what was the article about again?
Ceci n'est pas une sig.
So someday people might actually be more bone-headed than they are now!?! What are they thinking? ;-)
--
News for Geeks in Austin, TX
This reminds me of some cool photos I saw of a human ear growing on a mouse's back.
But really, what is the degree of dehumanization that we suffer from scientific advance? Were we made less "human" when Jenner worked on smallpox or Salk established preventive measures against polio? I would dare say that, regardless of how a person sees scientific advance currently, they would dare not declare that they wish to go back to the day when outbreaks and plagues cost hundreds of thousands of lives annually and kept the average lifespan around age 35.
So what about now? Science is necessarily dispassionate in its advance and this is its strength. And if science moves objectively and empirically toward a solution to nervous damange that involves transplantation or whatever, then so be it.
And in 20 years, I'll bet nobody will complain that grandma got 15 more good years to spend with her family because of an effective treatment discovered for stroke that some people back then thought was scary and dehumanizing.
Good point.
I've often been afraid that, because I carry a leather wallet, I might grow horns and develop three more stomachs.
Same thing with feather pillows. It makes me shudder to think that at any moment I might start craving sunflower seeds.
New born babies haven't grown their skulls yet, they can be used as torches - obviously bigger brains -> brighter light. It gives new meaning to the phrase 'he's a bright boy!'
-WolfWithoutAClause
"Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"The human body is only a shell. Humanity exists because of what you may call a ghost or a soul. It is being sentient that makes us human. No other animal is sentient on this planet.
By being sentient, we have created medical technology that allows humans who might otherwise die, to continue their influence on others.
Suppose that Stephen Hawking were about to die from ALS, would you not want a medical treatment that could restore his ability to exist, so that he may continue unraveling the secrets of the universe?
As it takes several petabytes of information to hold the contents of the brain in a computer, in addition to the fact that we have not been able to figure out how the brain stores that information so that we may be able to retrieve it, we can't preserve a person who's about to die but has not completed 'their life's work'.
Immortality certainly has philsophical implications (although i wouldn't say ethical) - If you have seen Robin William's 'Bicentennial Man', that movie addresses such philosophical issues.
I don't see how using xenografts degrade humanity - they actually are better than allografts because instead of using another human's organs, youre using an animal. If you had 1 month to live due to congestive heart failure would you rather receive a heart transplant from your dead sibling/parent or would rather receive a pig heart?
"And if it's true, that plastic is not degradable, well! the planet will simply incorporate plastic into a new paradigm: the Earth plus plastic."
-- George Carlin
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
"And like that
To be more inline with the story, you should say: pots don't kill brain cells bone-head.
Do what thou wilt is the whole of the law. The only way to be happy is to do what you feel like doing and be damned to morallity and consequences.
I'm sure ol' Adolf would have agreed! This is Slashdot's dirty secret out in the open now. Libertarianism leads to Fascism - one is only a stones throw away from the other, despite appearances to the contrary.
Your combination of technofetishism and fascism repulses me, although I imagine the average Slashdotter finds it quite attractive.
KTB:Lover, Poet, Artiste, Aesthete, Programmer.
KTB:Lover, Poet, Artiste, Aesthete, Programmer.
There is no
I would say that we need to take a step back and consider very carefully what we are doing and what we wish to achieve. Surely advances such as these take something away from us? Most right thinking people don't wantto be immortal. The medical technology we have already is quite good enough, thank you, without sacrificing our ethics in our lust for immortality.
I would like to see this research kept on hold, until we can guarrantee that Human Beings will not have to sacrifice their morality to benefit.
KTB:Lover, Poet, Artiste, Aesthete, Programmer.
KTB:Lover, Poet, Artiste, Aesthete, Programmer.
There is no
Read the FAQ.
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
can I smoke bone marrow to counteract killing my brain cells?
-gerbik
I think that the major use of grafting bone marrow cells would be in cases of spinal cord damage - even if a small section of nerve tissue was damaged beyond repair, a bone marrow graft could be induced to replace it. This avoids the loss-of-data issues theoretically possible with grafting into the brain. Networking is also a lot simpler in the spinal cord an the brain. If bone marrow cells can replace brain cells, they also ought to be able to replace spinal cord cells (both being part of the CNS, with lots of shared cellular architecture).
OTOH, reflexes controlled by that section of cord would be useless - a small price to pay, IMHO.
My other sig is also a
So you agree with this *u****i*?
Come on KtB, you were complaining about nazism two posts ago, and now you agree with ideas like survival of the fittest... If that sentence is not pure nazism, then we didn't read the same history book!
And by the way there is a fair number of physically challenged people living on medicine to sustain their life who have contributed considerably to technology, art or entreat associations. Should you have killed them / let them die because they were not fitted enough according to your rules? What about their fantatic brain power, love or creativity?
We don't live anymore in caves and don't go hunting with our bare hands to get food. We don't need to be able to outrun a Grizzly or fight without medicine all virii and infections we come across.
If you believe that survival of the fittest still appies to humankind, don't go to the pharmacy or call the doctor next time you're sick!
Maybe we can use this wonderful advance in medicine to help out the poor, unfortunate people in the US Patent Office, who seem to be in urgent need of this procedure...
Friends don't let friends use multiple inheritance.
It's not so much that we'll be injecting bone marrow into our brains before finals but that there may be an unknown mechanism for generating neurons. If it can be studied and understood (maybe using stem cells as a model) that raises the possibility of drugs that can accelerate that mechanism to speed recovery from brain damage.
However, what does begin to demonstrate that the bone-marrow cells actually became neuronal cells is the staining process, where you stain for neuronal proteins. Of course, B cells have a nasty habit of trapping free neuronal proteins, so you would have to control for that, but that can be overcome. Course, one would really like to see a protein affinity study to conclusively demonstrate that the cells are actually neuronal, but I'm not a neurologist, so I won't digress.
Merzey's work deals more elegantly with the problem by not dealing with GPF at all and instead heading straight for genetic material, by using male stem cells in a female mice. (XY instead of XX, trivial to find Y using staining microscopy) This cleans up most of the nastyness of the GPF.
In addition Merzy deals with the differentiation of neuronal cells much more effectively, convicing me at least that these stem cells actually became neuronal cells, rather than just leaking out into the brain accidental like. Of course, the real trick now is to figure out what got the cells to become neurons.
I'm going to guess that it only works in stem cells, and occurs because of the influence of neuronal proteins on neurons affects the differentiation of cells that can actually change fate into something that suits their environment. (Ie, have a non-locked (non-genetic) path determination). Probably just the proteins that turned the neurons into neurons in the first place continue to act on cells that through some strange occurence end up in the range of those proteins
Oh yeah... for those of you who are actually interested, here is the links to the articles. Turning Blood into Brain: Cells Bearing Neuronal Antigens Generated in Vivo from Bone Marrow and From Marrow to Brain: Expression of Neuronal Phenotypes in Adult Mice.
Science 290:1779 and Science 290:1775 respectively.
Don Armstrong -".naidnE elttiL etah I"
http://www.donarmstrong.com