Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Stem Cell Problems Slow Research

Posted by michael on from the unexplained-limburger-craving dept.

Jeremy Erwin writes: "George W. Bush essentially closed the door on the creation of new human embryonic stem cell lines by restricting the funding to 60 existing cell lines, most of which are covered by patents of one sort or another. But now it seems that most of these cell lines were cultured using mouse cells, possibly infecting the stem cells with murine viruses. The FDA, concerned that cross species organ transplantation may hasten the spread of such viruses, has all but banned the practice. According to this Washington Post article, this could make it difficult, if not impossible to use stem cells in human clinical trials."

4 of 236 comments (clear)

  1. Any geneticists in the house? by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Are embryonic stem cells the only feasible method of curing what ails us? How does that jive with this research? Are there other non-embryo based stem cells that can be used?

    It would seem that the fervor over this debate would die if there was some way to avoid using embryos altogether. Is it simply impossible to do this without them?

    Dancin Santa

  2. Adult stem cells by ZaMoose · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...have shown far more promise in terms of research. The fetal cells tend to be so maleable and flexible that they can grow wildly out of control with devstating consequences to the transplantee.

    Adult stem cells aren't as maleable, but they ARE more stable and better able to target specific ailments. Also, there's only a miniscule chance of a human rejecting its own cells.

    Besides, from all of the research I've seen, the stem cells contained in the umbilical cord of babies carried to-term are just as viable as those extracted from aborted ones. Why not concentrate your efforts on those, instead of making a reproductive issue out of the whole thing?

    --
    I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then you could keep Dracula and Superman away.
  3. Re:W's morally inconsistent position by brsett · · Score: 2, Interesting


    I defy anyone to explain to me how (as W would have it) it can be okay to finance research on human stem cell
    lines that were created before a certain date (date of W's speech?), and verboten to finance research on stem cells
    created after that date.


    Maybe he's a pragmatist. He couldn't bring back the dead embryo's, so might as well use them, even though he is opposed to embryo harvesting.

    Principles are a good thing if you're never wrong, I unfortunately cannot afford the luxury of principles . . . I'm wrong too often.

  4. What about new (non-fetal) sources? by Jetson · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Does this situation apply only to undifferentiated cells from fetal tissue or are other less controversial sources elegible for funding? Some Canadian researchers have managed to extract undifferentiated cells from the skin of living adult humans. It contains all of the same features found in fetal stem cells and can potentially be grown into nerve cells. Research continues to see if the skin-based nerve cells can carry signals the way fetal-stem-derived nerve cells do.

    I would think that the USA would be pretty quick to fund research using the Canadian skin cells since it would help get fetal cells out of the limelight.

    See the CBC story.