Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Claim Organs Grown From Stem Cells
Llywelyn writes: "It appears that some scientists in the United States are claiming that they have been able to grow functional organs (kidneys) from cloned cow embryotic stem cells. They have not yet released details on how exactly they did this, nor have they yet provided evidence for their claims, but admit to being only in the `proof of concept' phase in research. I guess we'll see down the road if this is legit or the increasingly common `Science by Press Release.'"
I've done it, and you can't see my evidence!
Sorry, can't consider it news until we see evidence.
For all we know, they are raving lunatics, or just getting media attention for more grant money.
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
"I guess we'll see down the road if this is legit or the increasingly common `Science by Press Release."
After consulting the magic 8 ball, I have to say the latter is probably true.
I would guess that money got a little tight and this is a good way to get more cash for research...
Or, could be I am tired of hearing about companies that make claims with no proof.
Sent from your iPad.
This company is the same one that claimed to have cloned human embryos, so we're already aware of their preference of press releases to peer-reviewed journals.
all of my organs were grown from stem cells.
My mom didn't even need a petri dish.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
It appears that some scientists in the United States are claiming that they have been able to grow functional organs (kidneys) from cloned cow embryotic stem cells.
Hmm i can see it now.... a can of spam that refills itself after you've eaten it...
I've found a way to transfer a googol of data in one second. I'm not ready to release a product yet, or hold public or private demos. But I can tell you that we've done some preliminary experiments involving filling a semi with CDRs and transporting the data for several feet. All we need to do is to refine the process so it doesn't require a 18 wheeler and trillions of CDRs and we'll have a revolutionary product. At out current rate we should have something by Q1 2003.
You can become a part of this exciting development by sending $100,000,000.00 to PayPal account #235224975645.
I should start answering those emails that promise me a brand new organ? I always thought it was a sex thing.
Disclaimer: MINAA (Mummy! I'm Not An Animal!)
The news come from ATC, the same company that pretended having cloned a human in november. However, these claims were probably premature. We should be skeptical about this kidney thing... publishing fist in New Scientist is not exactly standard for serious scientific results.
Wouldn't be the end of the entire vegetarian scene. To some people meat tastes bad in the same way some people don't like vegetables. There will always be some desirable health benefits to vegetarianism. Lab-grown meat may also introduce new health issues.
However, your idea of grown meat may have major benefit to people that already eat meat. Prices would likely drop since better cuts would be just as easy to produce and more common ones. Also the health of meat could probably improve (no more artificial hormones).
I can't spell or type, but that doesn't mean I'm unusually stupid.
My take on this "science by press release" is that they are doing it for political reasons. Stem cell research is controversial, and they want to campaign in favor of it by showing the public that it can have huge benefits. Imagine if everyone that had kidney trouble was able to get a transplant! Now doesn't that make you want to support stem cell research?
But I refuse to share my results or make them available in any way for peer review, because I have chosen money over credibility within the scientific community.
Seriously, there are good reasons the established scientific publishing system esists. Results are published and processes are defined for peer review in order to confirm findings. This is a perfectly reasonable and effective process that has worked for decades. The argument that the only ay you can make money with a scientific result is a falacy. Intellectual property laws have never been stronger. Patent law has never been stronger and many prescidents have been set with regard to patenting of gene sequences. There really is no excuse for failing to disclose findings in this day and age.
--CTH
--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
Makes sense, you know because Europeans have such a healthy beef market.
I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
Back in the day, people believed in the 4 elements of earth, air, fire, and water. Why? Well, because somebody said so.
They believed that frogs came from mud, that life just arrived, that the sun went around the earth, and many other things.
Then the Scientific Method came along, and it was a simple idea:
1. Conduct an experiment with two groups, and only change 1 thing in each group.
2. Compare the results. If the majority of the groups with the different variable are truly different, you can possibly attribute that result to your variable.
3. Publish your results and show the world exactly what steps you took.
4. Other people recreate your experiment. If they get the same conclusions, then your theory may be correct.
5. If others find a different way to prove/disprove your theory, then eventually the Truth can be decided.
In the end, that's what science and the scientific method are all about. The search for the Truth. Is it the only method? Probably not - there are many truths in the universe we can't prove under the microscope.
But is it the best way that fallible humans can use to attain Truth? So far, yup. And as long as the real scientists don't forget that, we don't have to worry about "science by press release".
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
ACT is not the friendly non-profit down the street supported by charity and gov't grants and staffed with university-affiliated researchers. The charities don't have this money and the US gov't is trying to decide if it should tolerate or squash these folks and in the meantime is such a slow & conflicted funding mess they're not worth the bother. And academia - they've either lost many of their best and brightest to these shops or are desperately trying to form "partnerships" in order to keep in the loop and when it rains gravy to catch a few drops.*
Rather there's lots of hungry investors with deep pockets willing to invest and get these folks the best equipment and shield them from committees and reviews and university politics and such until they're ready to ship. All these folks have to do is get cracking and produce some encouraging results regularly which in ACTs case is what they are doing.
Were their previous results controversial? Yes - possibly overstated. Is this one - possibly again. They've grown *something*, possibly successfully, possibly not. Nobody knows exactly what yet but that's not ACTs point, theirs is that they've even gotten this far. When they find out if it works then they'll announce that too but they're just announcing all of their milestones as they go along.
So why are they doing this? PR. Not just the we-need-funds PR that so many folks are used to seeing (ACT seems fine that way) but also the Hey-the-21st-century-is-coming-at-you way so when ACT does have something to sell the market is ready to buy. Those nice comfortable theoretical debates are becoming much realer much faster then anyone imagined and it's in ACTs interest to have they and the market mature when a product is availiable.
Finally - why aren't the procedures and details being released? Because this is leading-edge privately funded research worth billions. If the public wants access to it then it can darn well pay for it. No money for uneasy biotech and too bizarre a regulatory climate and it'll happen anyway just without public participation and without sharing.
The Genie is out of the bottle kids. Either work with it to shape it to needs and values at its rate of growth or fail to keep up and lose all control.
-- Michael
* For the computer-centric folks this is the same as happened to CS departments in the 80's & 90's. All of the action moved out to industry along with the silly money. If you wanted in on the action you had to get off campus. Nobody has ethical concerns if Cisco announces a routing breakthrough unlike biotech announcing a grown organ but it's really the same business model applied to a different field.
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
Its about goddam time, My sone , who is now 5 had a liver transplant at 9 months old. He had a disease called billiary atresia. There is no singular known cause, and no treatment except liver transplant, which does resolve the problem, as it is confined to the liver.
.....THERE IS NO MONEY IN IT FOR THE DRUG COMPAINES !, THE SAME WENT FOR ALTERNATIVE TX OPTIONS. This is horeshit.
We HAD a Living related donor TX for genetic matching reasons amongst others, my wife was actually genetically closer, so they whacked the left latteral lobe from her.
He has suffered NO rejection to date (98% of ALL liver TX have rejection to some degree in the first 14 days) he didnt even have that. NOW Liver rejection is much different from kidney or heart rejection, hyper-acute rejection (all of a sudden really bad) rarley happens then only early post TX. Livers can be in rejection for months and the patient not even know. Damage will be done if it isnt caught, but Liver regection is nearly ALWAYS controllable from and anti rejection standpoint.
NOW, wehn he was diagnosed I asked WHY in gods name wasnt there a cure, the answer very simple, from the then Head of UNOS (all organs are allocated from here) and the #2 ranked transplan surgeon in the world
The DRUGS to sustain liver TX arent cheap, kidneys and hearts are multitudes worse and the only ones worth a crap are pateneted. old crap like cyclosporin is fine if every 3 years you want to have your gums cut back (it makes em grow) and dont mind having ONE HUGE eyebrow(no shit) The pharm companies arent going to like this at all, I can see them lobbying hard against this forno other reason to save their profit centers.
Things happen , my sons chances and survival rate is exellent this far out from TX with no roblems (liver related) but if there is ever an injury he is much more succepible to liver necrosis, because he was given a liver half from a living person they could only take 1/2 the blood vessels, if he EVER has to be Re-TX I hope he could have his own genes in it and rejection would be a non issuse
Sig went tro...aahemmm.....fishing........
However, look at the situation:
Tens of thousands of researchers (yes, including federally funded ones) have been working on cancer treatment, in an effort that has gone on longer than anyone here has been alive. This could be because:
a. Evil capitalist greed is preventing the publication of the many potential cures that are right around the corner.
b. Curing cancer is a really hard problem.
I understand why you're angry enough to guess "a", but I don't think you're right.