Slashdot Mirror
Growing Teeth with Stem Cell Technology
davidoff404 writes "Lost a tooth lately? Well, a natural cure may be at hand. The BBC is reporting on a grant awarded to researchers at King's College, London, which they say will allow them to develop a technique for growing natural replacement teeth. Using recently developed techniques, stem cells can be programmed to develop into teeth, and then inserted into the gap in a patient's jaw. According to the BBC, the research has already been successfully performed on mice, and clinical trials on humans should begin within two years."
of all the things to grow are teeth. Why not something like hair. That's where the money is. Look at all the infomercials.
Evolution or ID?
submission says: According to the BBC, the research has already been successfully performed on mice, and clinical trials on humans should begin within two years.
However the story says: The company Odontis, set up by the college, hopes to develop its research for tests on humans within two years after successful research on mice.
It doesn't sound like they've actually grown MiceTeeth(tm) yet, unless I'm reading that terribly wrong.
It is my understanding that most of the differences in tooth health around the world are due to environmental variance. I grew up in a place where there was a lot of fluoride in the water, and the schools also had programs to provide additional fluoride. This has given me very hard tooth enamel. In the 30+ years of my life, I've only ever had one cavity filled. One would presume that they would grow the teeth in an environment that fosters teeth that are healthy.
When I want your opinion I will beat it out of you.
Prevention is better than a cure any day.
not the teeth part, but the technology itself.
but the teeth market won't be the market that fuels this research. No, the market is the hair loss market. the same stem cell technology is being used to replace teeth can replace hair follicles.
in traditional hair restoration, hair is transplanted from point A on the bottom of the scalp, where the follicles for some reason don't fall out like they do on the crown. this works, but the hair has to be spread thin, because there's only X amount you can take, and it means there's going to be missing hair from the bottom.
what the cloned hair would do is allow an arbitrary thickness and density of placement, not limited by the donors thickness and supply at the base, since you can take a small amount from the base, clone them to the amount you want, and make a better graft.
i can't wait, being 24 and nearly bald. fight genetics with science.
Reason, free market capitalism, and individualism
Too bad Bush won't allow the U.S. to fund this fantastic, useful research because it clashes with his religious ideals
Step back, oh, sixty-seventy years.
"Too bad the UK won't allow this stunning new Eugenics research, because it clashes with their religious ideals. I mean, it's not like they're PEOPLE or anything."
Stopping research because of religiously-based morals has a long and time-honored tradition, that didn't start with Bush and won't go away when he leaves office.
That said, Bush is just fine with companies doing research with "morally obtained" stem cells. I don't recall what the criteria is, but I do believe that "not from abortion" is a big one, and that about twenty (out of 100 or so) of the extant stem-cell lines qualify.
I'd go to the dentist with bad teeth, because they were probably looked after by the other dentist. Conversely, the dentist with good teeth was looked after by the "good dentist" with bad teeth.
Correction. It is supported by the vocal population. I bet 90 % of the people in this country could care less. They are too worried trying to find jobs and keep paying the rent.
Like all biological processes that will (should) be automatic. The simple fact that there is a tooth forming will encourage the growth of blood and nerve endings. Think about this. Before you get your teeth for the first time the plumbing is not yet wired in. Its only as the teeth start to grow that blood and nerves get wired up.
I'm sorry, but you are mistaken. While genetics has a some effect on good tooth health, good diet and the presence of fluoride have an even greater effect.
When I want your opinion I will beat it out of you.
IIAD (American working in England, actually), and I don't see this stuff coming into anyone's mouth for many years to come.
... yeah, they've grown teeth in rats, but in their intestines, IIRC (intentionally in the intestines, but it's still a far cry from functioning dentition in the mouth).
The hurdles here are the same as hurdles for growing ANY tissue from stem cells. You don't just turn stem cells loose and tell them to become teeth. There is a hugely complex interaction of intra- and inter-cellular communication that goes on that tells a given cell whether to become part of the pulp, whether to start secreting enamel matrix, becoming an odontoblast, etc. If this were just five years off, we'd only be five years off from growing *hands*, etc.
Even if we could grow *a* tooth, we would have to grow the *right* tooth, especially in the "esthetic zone". How do we make sure that it *looks* like a central incisor with 11mm of enamel showing above the gingiva? How do we make the color right? Do we just grow something that is sort of tooth-like and put a crown on it automatically? Do we grow it in vitro and implant it in a surgical site? Do we grow it in situ? If so, how do we maintain the delicate balance of cellular influences in a mouth where someone ostensibly couldn't even keep their natural teeth in order?
I think that this is waaaaaay off in the distance. Their five year estimate is pie-in-the-sky pulled-out-of-their-ass.
In addition
Stem cell research does not need to be used as a reason for killing off unwanted pregnancies.
When was it ever used as such? Abortions get chucked in biohazard bags and incinerated like any other sort of medical waste.
You're living in a fantasy world if you think that Superhero Bush stopped legions of money-grubbing women who were clamoring to make a quick buck off of their abortions.
This is a non-issue if you take the time to think about it. Trash... or valuable medical research. Trash... or valuable medical research. Tough call there.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Wrong. An individual who has no teeth will be at a serious disadvantage to even survive, let alone reproduce, especially if they have teeth that are specialized for a particular diet (like eating tough grass or crushing mollusk shells or something). In other words, it impacts the potential to have offspring. If the tooth loss has a genetic basis, then any offspring that the toothless individual does manage to have will be similarly disadvantaged when they reach reproductive age.. However, there would be comparatively little selection on a gene that caused all of their teeth to fall out the minute they finished reproducing.
This is pretty unique to humans in western cultures who eat too much refined sugar. Tooth decay like modern humans get is vanishingly rare in nature.
"Sort of set in stone" refers to phylogenetic inertia. Certain things just don't happen very often in evolution because of the difficulty of redesigning an organism. Why do ostriches have wings? Why do humans have an (apparently) nonfunctional vermiform appendix? Why do vertebrates have two sets of limbs instead of three sets? Why am I feeding a troll?
Maybe you should take a few biology courses yourself, mate.