Slashdot Mirror
Stem Cells Restore Feeling In Paraplegic
Vicissidude writes "According to WorldNetDaily scientists in Korea report using umbilical cord blood stem cells to restore feeling and mobility to a spinal-cord injury patient. The research, published in the peer-reviewed journal Cytotherapy, centered on a woman who had been a paraplegic 19 years due to an accident. After an infusion of umbilical cord blood stem cells, stunning results were recorded: 'The patient could move her hips and feel her hip skin on day 15 after transplantation. On day 25 after transplantation her feet responded to stimulation.'"
I agree with the sentiment against Bush's policies on stem-cell research. But isn't the type of stem-cell used in this article (umbilical cord) actually "okay" to use under the US policy?
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
- Charles Darwin
Title:
q lfhsywa55)/app/home/contribution.asp?referrer=pare nt&backto=issue,8,9;journal,1,40;linkingpublicatio nresults,1:107693,1
A 37-year-old spinal cord-injured female patient, transplanted of multipotent stem cells from human UC blood, with improved sensory perception and mobility, both functionally and morphologically: a case study pp. 368 - 373
K-S Kang, SW Kim, YH Oh, JW Yu, K-Y Kim, HK Park, C-H Song, H Han
DOI: 10.1080/14653240500238160
Abstract:
HLA-matched UC blood-derived multipotent stem cells were directly transplanted into the injured spinal cord site of a 37-year-old female patient suffering from spinal cord injury (SPI). In this case, human cord blood (UCB)-derived multipotent stem cells improved sensory perception and movement in the SPI patient's hips and thighs within 41 days of cell transplantation. CT and MRI results also showed regeneration of the spinal cord at the injured site and some of the cauda equina below it. Therefore, it is suggested that UCB multipotent stem cell transplantation could be a good treatment method for SPI patients.
http://journalsonline.tandf.co.uk/(hibl2tibmt1yld
Yes, it's only embryonic stem cell research outside the approved lines that won't receive federal funding. In individual states, such as California which just approved billions for stem cell research, you can receive state funding regardless of what type of stem cell you use.
The posted article does not mention that the patient also had a Lumbar laminectomy performed.
http://www.wesleyjsmith.com/blog/ We have to be cautious. One patient does not a treatment make. Also, the authors note that the lamenectomy the patient received might have offered some benefit. But still, this is a wonderful story that offers tremendous hope for paralyzed patients. Typically, it has been extensively ignored in the American media (although it has gotten some foreign press attention). (Can you imagine the headlines if the cells used had been embryonic?)
http://www.spineuniverse.com/displayarticle.php/ar ticle545.html
"The goal of a laminectomy is to relieve pressure on the spinal cord or spinal nerve by widening the spinal canal. This is done by removing or trimming the lamina (roof) of the vertebrae to create more space for the nerves."
He's not against stem cell research. He's against destroying embryos. Huge difference.
Your statement reminds me of a movie "Head of State" where there was a campaign ad from the opponent stating "Mays Gilliam for Cancer!"
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapac ific/view/119428/1/.html
I used it in a paper I wrote last year.
I am Jack's unoriginal sig.
The US under Bush is the first administration to fund stem cell research with federal money.
This is utterly and factually incorrect. What would be factually correct to say is that Bush was the first president to address the issue of stem cell research specifically. Stem cell research has been going on for years and years before the Bush administration came into power.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
It seems that science poses a threat an administration such as the current one.
I'd hate to destroy your little fantasy but...
NSF budget:
1998: $3.429 billion (clinton)
1999: $3.672 billion (clinton)
2000: $3.912 billion (clinton)
2001: $4.416 billion (clinton)
2002: $4.789 billion (bush)
2003: $5.344 billion (bush)
2004: $5.577 billion (bush)
2005: $5.473 billion (bush)
Plato on Ethics
Carefully re-read my post and respond to the points I made without inserting commentary or meaning that was not there. I did not say that Bush was against all stem cell research. I said specifically: "it is too bad the field of stem cell research in the US has been badly damaged by policies the current Whitehouse administration have put into place. A good number of scientific teams formerly here in the US have had to leave the country to continue their work and others are having to modify their protocols to use one of the "acceptable" lines of stem cells the Bush administration in their infinite wisdom have seen fit to approve
So, that implies directly that I acknowledged the Bush administration has allowed some stem cell research, but at the same time, has limited the kinds of research than can be accomplished. This has absolutely resulted in some scientific teams leaving the country to perform their work elsewhere.
Why has this become an issue? It was not previously an issue as stem cell research has been going in in federally funded laboratories for at least 20 years. It is an issue because it became a political issue that was religiously motivated.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
Here's the huge misconception about embryonic stem cells: They are not from aborted fetuses.
Embryonic stem cells from from blastocysts (on the order of 50-100 cells) that are derived from in vitro fertilization attempts where the fertilized eggs are to be discarded. It is one of those issues that has been clouded with talk of abortion (usually by opponents ESC research), and thus reasonable discussion is frequently overwhelmed by hysterical chatter that doesn't even relate to the topic.
If you are cool with IVF, then there is little reason to be upset about ESC research. If you aren't cool with ESC research, then it seems illogical to be ok with IVF. Abortion really does not enter into the discussion.
-Ted
-=-=- Quantum physics - the dreams stuff are made of.
Wow, given this potential, I am surprised this work was not published in one of the bigger journals like Science or Nature?
1 7575710440.htm
Mostly because this news is old hat.
Here is an article and a nice pic of the lady from 2004.
http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/200411/kt20041126
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
I have no problems with the links here. There is no "smiling man".
Perhaps you have a rootkit installed.
---
ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
Nerve cells will grow at a speed of about 1 mm per year.
Umm.. I'm about 1.82 meters tall, so my longest neurons are probably close to a meter long. I'm no spring chicken anymore, but I'm not 1,000 years old, either.
FWIW, the last time I had a nasty cut that made me lose sensation in the end of my thumb, my doctor told me that nerves regenerate about a mm per day. Sure enough, sensation returned in about a week.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Uhhhh.... let's see... WorldNetDaily reports on this supposedly important scientific research that "like most breakthroughs using adult stem cells, this one has been completely ignored by the U.S. mainstream media." Who do they interview about the research? The authors of the paper? No, someone from the (intelligent design proponents) Discovery Institute!
They don't even give the title, author or volume for the journal article. So how do we assess the veracity of this claim that adult stem cells can save paraplegics. I'll join the original poster in calling BULLSHIT until real scientists test and backup the claims.
WorldNetDaily, by the way, makes FOX News and CNN look like paragons of journalism. For them to report on anything scientific is laughable. For Slashdot to advertise it, doubly so.
The GP is a little mixed up. It's 1mm per DAY, not per year.
See http://www.teleemg.com/new/back_and_leg2.htm for one reference. (Second question on the page.)
-Ariel
If she gets up and walks, I don't think you need a peer reviewed journal to prove that the therapy works!
There is a picture of her doing just that here (sorry it's 3MB PDF file, pic is on page 30).
a lot of misinformation here.
1. peripheral nerves regenerate at the rate of about 1mm per day after an acute injury (assuming no other medical comorbidities that impair healing, inflammation, etc). that's about an inch a month. this article deals with central nervous system repair/regeneration so that information is not applicable.
2. are you arguing that all umbilical stem cells will ultimately return to the bone marrow regardless of which nerve growth factors they are given and irrespective of their site of implantation? you're assuming a lot about the technique used here and i don't think you can be so dismissive of the paper without reading it (my institution doesn't have access to that particular journal).
this is promising research, but i too am troubled by the fact that it was published in a relatively minor journal. animal models suggest that stem cells can be used to facilitate central nervous system (CNS_ regrowth. i'd like to know more about the woman's initial injury and resulting defecits. was it a cord transection or just a bad contusion? i'll also point out that the lower thoracic cord and cauda equina tolerate injury better than any other part of the CNS.
Er, they cut the spinal cord in half. They don't sever the rest of the mouse....
~Idarubicin
Correction: frozen 'eggs' are never thrown-out from infertility clinics, because eggs cannot be frozen for the purpose of fertility. Only sperm and already-fertilized embryos can be frozen. Very early-stage embryos are the things being thrown away.
Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain