Cells From Liposuction Function As Stem Cells?

texchanchan writes "Plastic surgeon Peter Fodor MD filtered stem cells out of fat sucked from people's oversized body parts, then cultured them into 'bone, cartilage, skeletal muscle and nerve cells.' At the rate of 10,000 stem cells per cm³ that's a lot of stem cells. Combine that with this and you might be on the road to regeneration. And, you can have your stem cells banked for later disasters after your liposuction."

Comments

Damn

[Spicy Bisquit]

And all this time I have been using it to make plastic explosives. Stupid Brad Pitt.

10,000?

[AlaskanUnderachiever]

10,000 per every 100cc is the rate I saw on the article. But even at 100 per cc that's still a lot of stem cells. So even with the total costs you're talking about a nice bank of totally rejection proof stem cells at under 20k. That's almost 1/10 of the price I've seen quoted as a "reasonable estimate" in the last few articles. "attention Kmart shoppers, stem cells kits are now on blue light special!"

Re:Fat as unwanted cells

[Drachemorder]

Actually, you're wrong. I'm as conservative as they come, and I have no problem with using fat cells for research. Neither do most people I know. I think this sort of research is a good thing because if it works out, I think there would be less pressure to use embryonic stem cells.

Re:Of course it's illegal

[Drachemorder]

I know I'm feeding a troll, but I should point out that the conservative objection to stem cell research is based on the belief that an embryo is a human life and should be treated as one. It isn't out of any "fear of science" or things of that nature.

You may not agree with that belief, and you have every right to disagree with it, but you should respect the fact that some conservatives actually have reasons for our positions ;)

Re:It looks like someone may have found a way

[jdavidb]

Yes. I don't believe in killing embryos and I'm thankful that we are still looking for alternatives. I only hope that these initial results pan out. (Those who are biased against the religious sometimes seem to take a particular glee when something like this doesn't pan out.)

The religious accuse the embryonic stem cell people of murder. On the other hand, those who could help people with embryonic stem cell research lay a similar charge back at the religious. The real problem is the people who try to pretend this is a clear cut issue and call you stupid if you don't take their side.

Re:Of course it's illegal

[jdavidb]

Is this why everyone was so mad at the right? Because of a misunderstanding?

We don't oppose stem cell research. We oppose the destruction of embryos. We believe, rightly or wrongly, that embryos are people and deserve protection. The other side should admit that that claim at least has merit, even if they don't agree. (Meaning it's a respectable, legitimate opinion; not just being hard to get along with or obstructionist.)

I don't think you'll find anyone on the right (at least, anyone who fully understands the issues) who will oppose stem cell research that does not involve killing embryoes. Hopefully the distinction is very clear to everyone.

Re:I wonder...

[RailGunner]

I can't speak for all Religious people, but I can certainly speak for myself. (In case you want clarification, I am a Christian. Catholic, more specifically.)

I'm against embryonic stem cell research, because the stem cells came from aborted human babies, and I personally believe abortion is murder.

However, I can't see anyone having a problem with stem cell research where the stem cells come from human fat. Nor can I see any reason to oppose stem cell research when the stem cells come from the umbilical cord of a newborn baby.

If you can, then you are probably also against blood transfusions, organ transplants, and other medical necessities because you mis-read your Bible.

But please.. not all of us religious people are "nuts". If you are a liberal and think that all religious people are nuts, then maybe you should practice some of that "tolerance" you like to preach about.

Of limited use (but still great news)...

[HorsePunchKid]

As I understand it, there are (at least) several types of stem cell that form a kind of heirarchy. At the top, there are totipotent stem cells, which can become any cell (more or less) in the human or the placenta. Once those cells differentiate, you get pluripotent stem cells, which can form any kind of tissue in the developing human. The next differentiation leads to various kinds of multipotent stem cells, which each have a more limited set of things they can eventually form. Note that these differentiations are difficult for biologists to control, since you need a rather precise mixture of biological chemicals in the cell's environment for it to turn into what you want it to.

So anyway, in this particular case, it's great that they can isolate such large quantities of stem cells safely from an adult human, but it's still rather limiting. All those cells will ever be able to form is bone, cartilage, and whatever else that particular type of multipotent cell can give rise to. This is why it's still important to many biologists to be able to collect less-differentiated stem cells. With only that type of cell, we may not be able to learn much about diseases that aren't specifically related to that limited set of tissues. (Though of course there's still a lot left to be learned about even a specific type of multipotent stem cell.)