Slashdot Mirror
Stem Cells in the Heart?
NewScientist reports that researchers have discovered stem cells in the heart, leading them to believe that the heart can regenerate itself. From the article: "The finding raises the possibility that these cardiac stem cells could one day be manipulated to rebuild tissues damaged by heart disease - still the leading cause of death in the US and UK. Because fully developed heart cells do not divide, experts have believed the organ was unable to regenerate after injury. But, in 2003, researchers at Piero Anversa's laboratory at New York Medical College in Valhalla, New York, US, discovered stem cells in the hearts of mice, and subsequently humans. However, they still did not know whether these stem cells actually resided in the heart or had merely migrated there from another tissue, such as bone marrow."
Well, since you aren't a researcher, lemme translate.
"Stem cells! Stem cells! Look, we found stem cells! Give us more grant money!"
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it!
The big news is that the heart was thought that it couldn't repair itself after damage has occurred. Damage like minor heart attacks (which people often don't even know about, yet still have them) create scars on the heart. Over time, the build up of these scars reduces the hearts ability to function properly. Now we learn, that there may be new hope in a heart that could regenerate. Think of all the lives that could be saved. That's the big deal!
However, they still did not know whether these stem cells actually resided in the heart or had merely migrated there from another tissue, such as bone marrow.
Well, bone marrow is reponsible for the production of blood cells, so having stem cells migrate into the blood stream and end up in the organ every ounce of one's blood eventually passes through makes sense to me.
preventing heart atacks.
Curing heart diseases is undoutedly important and necessary, but understanding why and how we have heart diseases could lead to less such diseases in the first place.
The problem - and not only with heart related diseases - is that there are quite a lot of life-style related causes, isn't it so?
And changing behaviours (what you eat, how you exercise, how you relate to your fellow human beings etc) is presently more "difficult" (for cultural reasons) than discovering cell manipulation techniques, that is, than intervening (than making a "patch").
That is the tradition bestowed upon us at least since Francis Bacon: the world, including nature and the human body, are objects which we can manage, alter, change to suit our "needs", to extract profit etc, because we can.
Instead of adopting a humbler attitude towards life, the universe and everything, trying to live seamlessly with our environment and with each others, we learned to alter the world so that it would adapat to our whims. The eventual errors, mistakes and disasters that follow such courses of action are tackled with further and deeper interventions.
Is it possible to change centuries of an intervention tradition, to try to understand and adapt to the environment and others, instead of adapting others and the environment to us?
Am I making any sense?
Those damned stem cells have infiltrated you from within.
You do have an extremely valid point. Many will probably poo-poo your thoughts, however (which is sad).
We live in a society in which we really don't respect what fragile gifts our bodies are. The mantra seems to be "you could be hit by a bus tomorrow so live it up!!". While it is true that at any time your body can cease to function for a myriad of reasons, chances are you are going to live to see 60. What then? Living an entire life smoking, eating like a slob, and sitting on the couch will have taken a toll. You are going to put all your eggs in the medical science basket? Assume they can cut you open and make you all better? I've seen those who live their whole life abusing their bodies. It isn't pretty. You may be still biologically functioning, but that sure isn't living.
The attitude in society should regard medical advances as a gift. A suppliment to a life of good eating and good living. As a way to give your body another 10 years which it might otherwise not have had. Sadly, it is viewed as an expectation.
If an officer ever threatens to taze you, say you have a pacemaker.
I say this because I know that there have been efforts to block research on ALL stem cells from ideological grounds, and not just embryonic stem cells. It is the reason why the US lead in stem cell research is shrinking.
And the cardiac stem cells could be used for other purposes as well eventually. It's funny how your argument contradicts itself, because if it were true, then embryonic stem cells would HAVE to be used for the aorta, making your rebuttal to my argument invalid anyway!
Do not downmod posts "overrated" simply because you disagree with them.
You assume theologans know and understand the difference. Some do, but a hell of a lot don't. They just hear the word stem cells, remember that their preacher said they were bad, and immediately go off. Its really an amazing brain washing system they have.
If they are "real" theologians, then its the preacher who would be listening to them, not the other way around. And yes, a "real" theologian would understand the difference.