Slashdot Mirror


FDA Approves First Brain Stem Cell Transplant

no reason to be here writes "An article at CNN.com is reporting on the FDA granting approval to the first ever transplant of fetal stem cells into human brains. The stem cells will be transplanted into six children suffering from Batten disease, a rare, always fatal, genetic neurological illness, which renders its victims blind and speechless before finally paralyzing them and killing them." From the article: "The stem cells to be transplanted in the brain aren't human embryonic stem cells, which are derived from days-old embryos. Instead, the cells are immature neural cells that are destined to turn into the mature cells that makeup a fully formed brain. Parkinson's disease patients and stroke victims have received transplants of fully formed brain cells before, but the malleable brain cells involved here have never before been implanted."

8 of 245 comments (clear)

  1. Really? by connah0047 · · Score: 5, Funny

    which renders its victims blind and speechless before finally paralyzing them and killing them...

    Sounds like marriage.

  2. Cells from miscarriages and abortions... by Dria+Rain · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Though there's legitimate ethical debate on abortions, I don't think this is much different than having your organs donated after you die.

    1. Re:Cells from miscarriages and abortions... by AxelBoldt · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Have you considered that some of us came to have different views of abortion through learning that we ourselves nearly got aborted?

      That can of course easily be turned into an argument against all forms of birth control ("some of us learned that we ourselves nearly were prevented from being conceived altogether!"), indeed it is an argument against allowing anyone of reproductive age to spend a waking minute not having unprotected sex.

    2. Re:Cells from miscarriages and abortions... by AxelBoldt · · Score: 5, Insightful
      One is preventing a process from ever starting, the other is terminating a process already in motion.

      That depends on where you put the boundaries of the process, which is ultimately subjective. I could describe the process as two people of the opposite sex meeting, falling in love, having sex, conceiving a child, and the child being born. Granted that contraception interrupts this natural process at an earlier stage than abortion (and abstinence interrupts even earlier), but they all interrupt.

  3. Um, a little misleading in the intro... by Overzeetop · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Aside from ripping the first four paragraphs verbatim, it says ITFA:

    "What's more, some of the brain cells to be implanted will be derived from aborted fetuses, which Caplan also said raised ethical concerns for some."

    so the whole misdirection of not being embrionic is "technical" in nature for the right-to-life crowd.

    Anyway, it all seems academic until you read the bit at the bottom about the fellow who is going to enroll his 5 year old son, in hopes of not having to see his child die a horrible, slow death right in front of his eyes, with nothing he can do to save him. I think you have to be a parent to understand the enormity of the situation - I know for a fact that before I had a child, I wouldn't have experienced that "oh, my god" sinking feeling when reading his comments. I hope it works, and I fear that it works.

    Why do I fear that it works? Politics. If it works, there will be a "cure" for this horrible affliction. And it will likely require stem cells from pre-term fetuses, at least initially. If there's only one thing I can think of that's worse that seeing your child die slowly and painfully in front of you while you can't do anything to help, it would be having your child die slowly and painfully in front of you, knowing that there is a cure and not being able to get the cure. The fact that it would be the "religious" right that would block you from saving your own child is just and extra bone to try and swallow.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    1. Re:Um, a little misleading in the intro... by omeomi · · Score: 5, Funny

      if she ever does need some kind of treatment that someone objects to on religious grounds, that someone had better stay the hell out of my way.

      Amen!

  4. Bush is scheduled too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    George is looking forward to his first human brain cells.

  5. The religious / pro life argument is insensible by whogben · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure, even if you believe a fetus is a human being - if it comes to one life for another, the potential to be a human shouldn't surpass an actual, living human in need of help! The counterclaim has sometimes been: We aren't gods! Giving life to Jimmy at the expense of the fetus is arrogance in the face of God! Wait a moment - when has it not been ok to choose one life over another? Where was the religious right during the cold war? Or the Iraq war? Or capital punishment? Surprise - life vs life decisions are made all the time, for a variety of reasons, convenience among others - by those same people who will tell you that they can't choose in the case of "fetus 4971 Vrs Jimmy"