Slashdot Mirror


3D Human Cells Grown

SR_melb writes writes to tell us that Melbourn researchers have, for the first time, managed to grow three dimensional human cells. This bypasses previous achievements of only being able to create two-dimensional constructions like skin. From the article: "Professor Wayne Morrison, from Melbourne's Bernard O'Brien Institute of Microsurgery has led the breakthrough. He says it's a world first and predicts the discovery will ultimately lead to the creation of human organs, including parts of the heart, by using the patients' own stem cells. Such a scenario, says Professor Morrison, would reduce the problem of immune rejection which is often associated with organ transplants."

138 comments

  1. As overheard in the lab. by grub · · Score: 5, Funny



    Intern: Professor Morrison, we've had over 800,000 similar requests for a replacement penis and hand!
    Morrison: Ahhh, yes. News of our discovery must have made it to Slashdot!

    --
    Trolling is a art,
    1. Re:As overheard in the lab. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would certainly give this a +5, come on, the guy had the penis AND hand. :)

    2. Re:As overheard in the lab. by darkmeridian · · Score: 1

      "Intern: Professor Morrison, we've had over 800,000 similar requests for a replacement penis and hand!"

      I don't think you meant to say what you said. However, that would dramatically change what a "hand job" is.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    3. Re:As overheard in the lab. by Lord+Prox · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      FTA "Now currently we have been able to make breast tissue, fat, muscle, pancreas tissue that secretes insulin and we have also created thymus tissue, which may have an application in immunology."

      I think I just heard milions of strippers cry out in unison Do you accept credit cards?!?!! In addation to the end of bad boob jobs, there are around 150,000 mastectomies a year that can be rebuild afterward as well.




      Got Debt?

  2. Mmmmmmm red and blue cells..... by Iguru42 · · Score: 0

    Now if they could only solve the pesky problem of the cells going flat and generally just looking like crap after they take off their glasses, they'd really have something.

  3. 3D cells? by bohemian72 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Funny. I didn't realize there were any 2D human cells. Maybe that's how Flat Stanley was able to slide under the door.

    --
    The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return.
    1. Re:3D cells? by I+Like+Pudding · · Score: 1

      I don't think he'd be sliding under much of anything without a time dimension

    2. Re:3D cells? by Hot_Shot_NN · · Score: 1

      I'll wait till they produce the first 5D Cells. Oh wait, they have cubes already... http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/06/04/ 1211220

    3. Re:3D cells? by Solder+Fumes · · Score: 1

      Google is always an excellent safeguard against looking like an idiot.

    4. Re:3D cells? by 955301 · · Score: 1
      --
      You are checking your backups, aren't you?
    5. Re:3D cells? by Emetophobe · · Score: 1
      Funny. I didn't realize there were any 2D human cells. Maybe that's how Flat Stanley was able to slide under the door.
      Lol. I thought all cells have a thickness, it's just microscopic. I've seen my own red blood cells under a microscope before and they look alot like little red donuts (Red Blood Cells.
    6. Re:3D cells? by It'sYerMam · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Like, OMG!! You know slashdot's going down the pan when its members say 'lol.' And contract 'a lot.'

      --
      im in ur .sig, writin ur memes.
    7. Re:3D cells? by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      bump

      --
      If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
    8. Re:3D cells? by crazed+gremlin · · Score: 1

      I thought 1st dimension is time!

    9. Re:3D cells? by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      But the apostrophe. Won't somebody please think of the apostrophy?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    10. Re:3D cells? by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      That's a common misperception among people who have never seen Kate Moss stand sideways.

    11. Re:3D cells? by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Which, by definition, is everyone.

  4. Goodness by electrosoccertux · · Score: 1

    And all this time I thought our cells where only 2D.

    1. Re:Goodness by dick+pubes · · Score: 1

      I can tell how much money your parents made from reading that comment.

    2. Re:Goodness by ackthpt · · Score: 1
      And all this time I thought our cells where only 2D.

      Skin is flat tissue, but has multiple layers. I suppose what they grow in labs is only the epidermis.

      But what about the bladders that they've been growing in labs? Isn't that organ a combination of tissue types and more than simply 2D, i.e. muscle and the lining? See some info about it here. These replacement bladders are in people right now.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    3. Re:Goodness by nizo · · Score: 1

      Only if you live in Flatland.

    4. Re:Goodness by Sneer · · Score: 1

      Of course there's mistake with dimensions, it's about tissue structures and not cells. But there's one more mistake. My wife was involved in project of growing 3d human structures based on diverse composite materials as 'skeleton' to structures and I rememeber very clearly, that there were several succesful researches, where some 3d human structures (AFAIK ear and nose) were created.
      The problem was, that creating the shape is very difficult (but possible, I had no problem with recognizing the ear) and with lack of clinical application. Information was from medline, the service that is not freely accessible - so I can't share you direct link.
      So I don't understand, what australian researchers have done, in fact.

      --
      -- Sneer
    5. Re:Goodness by RockModeNick · · Score: 1

      They are very close to being just a membrane, very very thin, and were mechanically constructed into shape after being grown. No muscle layers were added, the patients own were used.

  5. Sold! by Itninja · · Score: 5, Funny

    FTA: Now, currently we have been able to make breast tissue...

    Great, I'll take two please.

    --
    I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
    1. Re:Sold! by Abreu · · Score: 1

      You want breast implants?

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    2. Re:Sold! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most Slashdotters have never seen breasts in 3D!

    3. Re:Sold! by dr_dank · · Score: 1

      Most Slashdotters have never seen breasts in 3D!

      Wrong. Most of us have played Tomb Raider.

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    4. Re:Sold! by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Agreed. Nothing like a coupla breast tissues for when you've got the sniffles...

      *insert joke about snorting coke of a hooker's breasts*

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    5. Re:Sold! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I meant true (real-life) 3D, thanks for proving the point :)

    6. Re:Sold! by suv4x4 · · Score: 1

      FTA: Now, currently we have been able to make breast tissue...

      Sure, of course, we could use it to cure paralized patients and cancer, but boob jobs and growing longer eye-lids would do.

    7. Re:Sold! by HarvardAce · · Score: 1
      Sure, of course, we could use it to cure paralized patients and cancer, but boob jobs and growing longer eye-lids would do.

      Longer eye-lids? Is there some new fad that I don't know about?

      --
      Note to self: Stop putting jokes in my insightful comments so I can get something other than +1 Funny!
  6. The catch... by GillBates0 · · Score: 4, Funny

    The only catch is that you have to wear wacky-looking glasses to see them in 3D.

    --
    An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
  7. 2D Cells by Umbral+Blot · · Score: 1

    I think 2D cells yould have been much more interesting, as it would imply that cells could operate with only one atom's worth of height. Unfortunately the submitter meanst 2D arragements of cells, which is much less cool. For example read: The Planiverse.

    1. Re:2D Cells by geoffspear · · Score: 1

      Atoms are not two dimensional.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    2. Re:2D Cells by Umbral+Blot · · Score: 1

      Obviously not (duh), but a one atome layer is effectively two dimensional, since no 3D structures/molecules could be formed.

    3. Re:2D Cells by legallyillegal · · Score: 1

      pay attention in science class much?
      an atom consists of 3 parts, forming a 3D object

      --
      ?giS
    4. Re:2D Cells by fubar1971 · · Score: 1

      3D - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3_dimensional
      I believe atoms have all 3 dimensions?

    5. Re:2D Cells by StarkRG · · Score: 1

      Exactly, if they were truly 2D then no matter how many you stacked on top of each other they wouldn't gain any width. If you managed to make a 2D animal (and figured out a way for it to ingest sustinance since having a tube all the way through would mean it'd be two entities (yeah, I've read flatland)) you could fold it up and store an infinate number in an envelope... If it were inteligent you could store an entire army inside an envilope and mail it to the country you're trying to invade...

    6. Re:2D Cells by Umbral+Blot · · Score: 1

      Yes, but you couldn't form 3D structures out of a 2D field of atoms, in the sense that the STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS couldn't make use of the third dimension.

    7. Re:2D Cells by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 1

      dude, this is slashdot.
      our dimensions are x y and z. and not "effective" inches.
      either you have a z or you don't.

      --
      If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
    8. Re:2D Cells by wingsofchai · · Score: 1
      dude, this is slashdot. our dimensions are x y and z. and not "effective" inches. either you have a z or you don't.
      Are you implying that I could be missing my depth?
      --
      Reading at high threshold levels is group-think.
    9. Re:2D Cells by RockModeNick · · Score: 1

      But sadly you couldn't stack them, fold them, etc, because there is no existence to use to do so in a truely 2D place.

    10. Re:2D Cells by StarkRG · · Score: 1

      In a 2D place, no, but if you had 2D intelligent beings in our 3+D space then you could, they'd have no mass to speak of but they would have area, and you can manipulate an object just interacting with the surface (fold a piece of paper without touching the edges).

      Of course, the main problem is that, since they're thinner than an atom the edge would be so sharp it'd slice through anything, including the envilope...

      Hmm, I wonder what would happen if it sliced through the nucleus of an atom... baboom! just think "One false move and the whole city gets it"

    11. Re:2D Cells by LouisZepher · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of a classic episode of Outer Limits. Too lazy at the moment to google for the ep title/number though...

  8. title a little misleading by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Informative

    what the editor/ writer meant was "Human Cells Grown in a 3D Matrix"

    that would have conveyed the substance of the story better, without idiots being confused and dorks laughing at the idiocy of the title, of which there is certainly to be a deluge of such comments

    the title "4D Human Cells Grown" or "2D Human Cells Grown"... now that would have been interesting, as the laws of physics as we know them would have been breached, nevermind the laws of biology ;-)

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:title a little misleading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      '"4D Human Cells Grown" ....as the laws of physics as we know them would have been breached'

      I hereby deem your cells are not allowed to change over time.

    2. Re:title a little misleading by geoffspear · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, they also claimed that these researchers grew 3D human cells for the first time, which is really incredibly stupid. I've been growing 3D human cells for over 30 years.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    3. Re:title a little misleading by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've been growing 3D human cells for over 30 years.

      If you've been growing them for over 30 years - they're 4D ;-)

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    4. Re:title a little misleading by Evanisincontrol · · Score: 1

      Change over time? Forget change... there wouldn't be time at all. At least you know you'd never die.

      I just can't wait until mixes this up with String theory. "11-dimensional cells grown!"

  9. Re:just an observation by tbmcmullen · · Score: 1

    Blast it's non-harsh colors and easy-on-the-eyes rounded corners. How could they do such a thing?!

  10. Well... by Zenikase · · Score: 0, Funny

    I, for one, welcome our new 3D unicellular overlords.

  11. You mean human cells are not 2D? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    When I looked at the diagrams in my biology textbook, they always seemed to be 2D.

  12. Gasp! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait, you mean they made a breakthrough using ADULT stem cells? They can't do that! Weren't we told that only embryonic stem cells were the answer to every disease known to mankind? What kind of frauds are these guys?

    1. Re:Gasp! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No! The only answer is to cut funding to embryonic stem cell research! God will cure all the diseases! Right?

  13. Insensitive clod!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    ....without idiots being confused and dorks laughing at the idiocy of the title,..... the title "4D Human Cells Grown"...now that would have been interesting, as the laws of physics as we know them would have been breached, nevermind the laws of biology ;-)

    I live in multiple time dimensions you insensitive clod!

  14. It's been done. by Some+Woman · · Score: 1

    How is that different from the extracellular matrices used for cell growth as described in this article?

    --
    My dingo ate your honor student.
    1. Re:It's been done. by Pavan_Gupta · · Score: 1

      It's really not different. Tissue Engineering, as far as I know, has long since been able to do this. It's just the concept of using an artificial scaffold of some sort (or a patented box, as described in this article) to support the artificial recreation of some sort of multilayered tissue. In this case, it happened to be Heart Tissue, but in most of the cases that I've read about and studied -- it's tended to be something like skin grafts, artificial tendons, etc.

      This is hardly breaking news, if any news at all. Frankly, the article is written quite ambiguously -- no one can really clarify what this patented box really does and honestly, it seems like it's a pretty lame breakthrough in general. If a breakthrough at all. Check pubmed for this article: " Cell transplantation for heart failure, and tissue engineering of cardiovascular structures."

      But then again, that's why Slashdot is a place to begin learning.. half the time I don't know if some "breakthrough" in x field is really a breakthrough until I find the mad scientist who clarifies. Anyway, Tissue Engineering is interesting regardless. Check it out.

  15. Re:utilization of a growth matrix by callistra.moonshadow · · Score: 1

    One thing that researchers have managed is to grow bladders using a cellular matrix or structure. I've read that they have successfully used such a technique to grow bladders for people that have lost theirs to diseases such as cancer. Now having the ability to grow fully functional organs without the need for a matrix of some type is outstanding for the future of organ replacement.

    --
    --Cally
  16. a good first start... by timster · · Score: 1

    Now all they need to do is figure out how to correct the DNA sequence that caused me to need a transplant in the first place and we'll be set. Another copy of the first two organs wouldn't do me a whole lot of good...

    --
    I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
    1. Re:a good first start... by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      Another copy of the first two organs wouldn't do me a whole lot of good...

      Well, let's examine that.

      So, if you're 82 and your heart is failing - don't you want a new heart (assuming we can rebuild the telomeres and it's not like Dolly the Sheep who is as old as her "parent")? How about if your eye was damaged - we can get you an undamaged eye.

      Now, admittedly, if you have a genetic disease - or even something like Alzheimers or Parkinsons (the latter is your energy cells - mitochondria - starting to fail) - this probably wouldn't help.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  17. Not really the first.... by btpier · · Score: 4, Informative

    This article http://www.startribune.com/535/story/45512.html from a year ago would make me believe the researchers in Australia were not the first to accomplish this. Either that or they've taken a long time to tell anyone about it. The Star Tribune article is actually more interesting in that it gives more specifics on how the cells were actually grown.

    1. Re:Not really the first.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The article doesn't really say what it's the first to do. Cells have been grown in matrices for a long time. Look at Dermagraft(tm), or the work by Anthony Atala http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd= Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=1663187 9&query_hl=2&itool=pubmed_docsum, or Linda Griffith http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd= Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=1649602 3&query_hl=3&itool=pubmed_docsum, or anyone else who has been doing this same exact thing for years.

  18. thats wierd by dilvish_the_damned · · Score: 4, Funny

    Melbourn researchers have, for the first time, managed to grow three dimensional human cells.

    I've been doing that for years.

    --
    I think you underestimate just how much I just dont care.
    1. Re:thats wierd by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 1

      Melbourn researchers have, for the first time, managed to grow three dimensional human cells.

      Any chance the editors could RTFA and add the "e" to the end of Melbourne?

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
  19. Re-rolling for a 20... by HalfOfOne · · Score: 1

    I know you meant your comment sarcastically, but it begs an interesting question. The body would regrow these organs based on a DNA map that probably wasn't explicit in every detail, only the important structural ones. It's likely that variations could happen each time the organ was grown, even on the same subject.

    I'm imagining a Slashdot geek removing a certain "organ" and depleting their reserve of stem cells trying to grow a bigger and better one...re-rolling for a 20 style.

  20. again and again by mapkinase · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Article does not have any indication to a peer-reviewed publications. My attempts to Pubmed it did not succeed.

    No comments until the reference will pop up.

    --
    I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  21. Stem Cells Huh? by Spritzer · · Score: 1

    "Now Mr. Spritzer, we're only going to extract these cells for use in growing you a new heart. None of the material will be sent to the labs at Harvard. We swear."

    1. Re:Stem Cells Huh? by Nesetril · · Score: 1

      hey, there is nothing wrong with creating an army of cloned assassins like Agent 47.

      --
      Jesus said to his disciples: "If you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one" - Luke 22:36
  22. Rejection in classic transplants only possible? by w33t · · Score: 1

    FTA:"...reduce the problem of immune rejection which is often associated with organ transplants."

    I had always assumed that immune rejection ALWAYS happened with organ transplants. Are there cases where a transplant has occured without rejection?

    1. Re:Rejection in classic transplants only possible? by Nesetril · · Score: 1

      they suppress the immune system big time before any transplants. and of course there is a reasonable chance of success, or you wouldn't see so many "i'm an organ donor" bumper stickers, lol.

      --
      Jesus said to his disciples: "If you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one" - Luke 22:36
    2. Re:Rejection in classic transplants only possible? by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      Are there cases where a transplant has occured without rejection?

      In cases where the source material is already from the recipient? Ribs reused as jaw bones, skin grafts, moving fat from stomach to breasts or bottom...

      I wonder though about identical twins. Theoretically, couldn't they share organs without rejection? Of course, if one needs an organ due to a genetic disease, they probably both need it...

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    3. Re:Rejection in classic transplants only possible? by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      Yes, in identical twins and with cloned tissue, rejection does not occur.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    4. Re:Rejection in classic transplants only possible? by lowLark · · Score: 2, Informative

      The are actually different levels of immuno compatibility between different cells from different individuals . The "big red flags" of immnocompatibility are called the major histocompatibility complex (HMC's). Large differences in HMC genotypes pretty much ensures tissue rejection, called acute rejection. Twins and cloned tissue have identical MHC's, so this is why they are the prefered donors where possible. This is highest in the first 3 months after transplantation, and is lowered by immunosuppressive agents in maintenance therapy. There are also a host of minor histocompatibility complexes, which can over time elicit at response called chronic rejection, or chronic allograft vasculopathy, which takes about a decade and leads to fibrosis of the vasculature of the new organ. The reasons why some patients end up in rejection while others seem to adapt is not fully understood.

    5. Re:Rejection in classic transplants only possible? by diakka · · Score: 1

      I believe the first successful kidney transplant was between identical twins, back before they had drugs to deal with rejection.

      --
      -- Knowledge shared is power lost. -- Aleister Crowley
    6. Re:Rejection in classic transplants only possible? by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      I had always assumed that immune rejection ALWAYS happened with organ transplants.

      Correct. There are several types of rejection as well, including rejection of the transplanted organ by the host, and rejection of the HOST by the transplanted organ. They each have 3 major types - acute rejection, hyperacute rejection, and chronic rejection.

      Are there cases where a transplant has occured without rejection?

            As in a dead patient, or one whose immune system was depressed a little too far (whoops) so that s/he also dies? Yes. Don't sneeze around these people.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    7. Re:Rejection in classic transplants only possible? by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      in identical twins and with cloned tissue, rejection does not occur.

            You would be surprised. It can occur. Even people with the same genetic material can have different cell receptors. The chance of this is very small, but it has happened.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    8. Re:Rejection in classic transplants only possible? by ral8158 · · Score: 0

      ...Yes. Most of them.

    9. Re:Rejection in classic transplants only possible? by w33t · · Score: 1

      Interesting, thank you for that information :)

      I wonder if you know of any theories for why some people develop the chronic rejection condition?

  23. Foreign Investment Opportunities by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Britain's 19th Century industry was so obsessed with railroads that it missed the chance to grow into cars. Britain has an auto industry, but it was easily eclipsed by the American car startups like Henry Ford.

    America's 20th Century industry was so obsessed with drugs that it's missing the chance to grow into stemcells. Not just from complacency, but from actually outlawing stemcell research. American medical domination of the world can be eclipsed by foreign startups without such handicaps.

    The US laws against stemcell prohibit the public investments in the basic science that the medical industry requires to take risks and develop the science. We have entrepreneurs, but they're both averse to medical science and drawn to the indemnities and subsidies available to drug research instead. Abroad there is much less inhibition, which is an opportunity. So stemcell research isn't stopped worldwide, though it is slowed, and less available to the Americans who should be able to dominate it too, instead of being left behind.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by IDontAgreeWithYou · · Score: 1

      A. Stemcell research has not been outlawed.

      B. There is NO guarantee that embryonic stem cells will ever cure anything.

      I'm not at all against stem cell research of any kind, I just get tired of everybody acting like stem cells will provide the cure for everything. So far, not a whole lot has come of embryonic stem cell research.

      --
      Finding other idiots on /. that agree with your opinion doesn't make it any less stupid.
    2. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by Khomar · · Score: 1, Insightful
      America's 20th Century industry was so obsessed with drugs that it's missing the chance to grow into stemcells. Not just from complacency, but from actually outlawing stemcell research. American medical domination of the world can be eclipsed by foreign startups without such handicaps.

      No, what was outlawed was the use of embryonic stem cells not stemcells altogether. There are other sources of stemcells than just those from unborn babies. The fear was that by allowing the use of embryonic stem cells to be used is research, we would be justifying abortion and therefore setting a precendent that it is okay to end human life for medical research. To take a completely utilitarian view on this is to challenge our very identity as humans, and I do not fault anyone from examining this issue closely even if it means halting "progress".

      This is far from an academic or theological debate. Nearly every civilization that has collapsed throughout history can link its decline to an abandonment of the principles on which it was built. Once you make the choice that there is such a thing as a life not worth living, where do you draw the line? What if we determine that by using one person's stem cells, another person can extend their life by another 100 years? Should we start harvesting the poor to provide those stem cells for the more fortunate? Maybe we just start taking them from people that we don't agree with politically. Since the moral barrier of valuing all human life has already been crossed, what would stop us?

      It doesn't sound good to halt progress, but when that progress can lead to a serious degradation of ethics, caution is the far better choice.

      --

      I believe in de-evolution. God made the world perfect, man fell, and its been going downhill ever since!

    3. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A. Some (substantial) stemcell research has been prevented by law.
      B No one ever mentioned any guarantee.

      "B" is the most interesting part of your response. My post explicitly mentioned how outlawing government funds has made the risky research less attractive for investors. And the part where you argue against "everybody acting like stem cells will provide the cure for everything" completes the picture. Not "everyone", not "provide the cure for everything". That's the kind of hyperbolic strawman that people use to defend the US government's unwise policy against some important stemcell research.

      By making those illogical arguments defending the US policy, you of course are acting against some kinds of stemcell reserach. Denying that you are doing so is also part of the same political posture that brings us these bad policies, while pandering to the least logical part of our population.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    4. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >No, what was outlawed was the use of embryonic stem cells not stemcells altogether.

      Actually that wasn't outlawed either. What isn't currently allowed is for "public funds" to be used for this research. Privately a company can still do research with embryonic cells if they so choose.

    5. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      "Britain has an auto industry, but it was easily eclipsed by the American car startups like Henry Ford."

      That's due more to Ford's innovations (assembly line, etc) and philosophy of producing a car for the masses than any industry obsession. Also, the size and low population density of the US was a deciding factor for capitalists -- most train lines in the US weren't that profitable unless you had a monopoly and could exploit it. In addition, coal was widely available in Britain, but gasoline was not for quite some time. Trains can run on coal; it's far too impractical for autos.

      Finally, the US economy was in a different position than the British economy at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries, Britain was slower to enter and recover from the recession of the 1880s, resulting in few consumers with the reosurces to purchase Britain's relatively expensive cars. It wasn't until the 1930s that Britain's agricultural depression lifted, mostly as a result of scarcity of supply in the European mainland and the US -- and at this point British carmakers did quite well considering their late entry into the market.

      Also, note that it was the Germans who invented the gas-powered motor and the gas-powered car.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    6. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      America is probably the only country, let alone "civilization", built on principles rather than merely the expediency of history at its founding. Unless you mean "this guy is now in charge" is a principle. Even the basis for the "embryonic stemcell research will speed the destruction of our civilization" is invalid, to say nothing of its more elaborate political conjectures. Not to mention the founding American principle of public protection of science and individual achievement.

      The "creating a demand for abortion" premise for outlawing public investment in embryonic stemcell research also falls apart under any scrutiny. Private investment includes more competition, therefore more waste, therefore a higher demand for more stemcells. We also have a huge glut in embryonic stemcell supply, from the large (and increasing) rate of abortions. Which are increasing under the same policies invalid both theoretically and practically. None of your scary scenarios have any basis in how stemcells, or even American embryos, work in reality.

      The threat to America, and the civilization of which we are a part, is pandering to uneducated, antilogical masses to cover for corporate exploitation. In this case, the drug companies protect their subsidies from the threats of stemcell therapy competitors by inciting religious gangs. To whom they then sell more expensive, less effective drug therapies. The process protects the politicians who protect their industry. At the expense in health and money of everyone but the drug corporation owners, and the politicians they own - and even their health is worse off. And the perversion of our science and politics to serve that subjugation does have the makings of at least defeat of America, if not our destruction, but not the rest of our "civilization", which has plenty of other players not turning history, politics, economics, ethics, science, or logic upside down.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    7. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by nido · · Score: 1

      America's 20th Century industry was so obsessed with drugs ...

      Seeking health is by necessity an individualized process. Medicine is a "practice" and not a "science" because everyone responds differently, sometimes radically, sometimes ever so slightly, to the same treatment protocol.

      The obsession with drugs came about by certain interests hijacking the medical education process (AMA, Flexner report, etc), standardizing on allopathic modalities (suppressing or treating the symptoms with drugs - tylenol for a fevor, shot to boost red blood cell count, etc), and lobbying to to suppress all alternatives. This allows for moneyed interests on Wall Street to profiteer on an otherwise private transaction, by artificially making their high-priced product an integral part of the medical process.

      Some professions have succeeded in counter-lobbying for their right to practice too, with Osteopathic being the only full-privledged of the alternatives (though most D.O.s have been subsumed into medical orthodoxy with only a handful today implementing Dr. Still's revelation in their practice). Chiropractic and naturopathy are two of the others. I'm not a big fan of chiropractic, but it has its uses. Not familiar with naturopathy, Osteopathic Manipulation is the greatest. (see my comment history :).

        100 years of Medical Robery
        Real Medical Freedom

      Drugs and surgery have their places, but usually some other therapy is called for.

      (I took my grandmother out to Mayo Clinic weekly for six months for a $1k injection of some drug to boost her red blood cell count. She had bone cancer, and was also undergoing various chemotherapies - her doctor was "practicing" on her. After 6 months and $50k+ spent on her behalf by Medicare/supplemental, she started hospice care, and finished in a week. Doctor: "oops, lost another one. Maybe these drugs will work on the next patient..." Total waste of money, time and effort.)

      --
      Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
      www.teslabox.com
    8. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      American railroads created more wealth among more new owners more quickly than ever before in any human endeavor. Britain, too. To complete the picture, America's vast emptiness was an even better home to railroads, with its few endpoints, than was Britain, which was better served by smaller scale vehicles like cars. But Britain was distracted by the shorter-term prospects of "railroading the world", while American entrepreneurs like Ford had to compete with American domestic monopolies. Ford's assembly line was just as viable in Britain as it was in his American competitors' factories.

      This is exactly parallel to the current American medical predisposition for "drugging the world", rather than move on to riskier, but longer-term strategies like stemcells.

      As for the economic epochs you mention, the car industry started in earnest during the Great Depression.

      And I further note that the Benz's car invention was designed to run on fuel grown on farms, not pumped from the ground. Which is more a background on how Britain's investors were more attracted by their colonial oil deposits, as were Americans, than in scaling up domestic farm production for fuel (while losing colonial farm production competition), to the benefit of all their industries. Including the drug industry, which basically extracts ex-colonial plant medicine formulas for mass production from petroleum.

      The parallels are not only very complete, they form a virtual parallelogram when considering the independent axes. This framework is extremely solid.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    9. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by Colonel+Angus · · Score: 2, Informative

      This woman is able to walk againis able to walk again after being paralyzed for 20 years due to an accident.

      This boy was going to die before his 17th birthday from sickle cell anemia.

      It may not be a cure-all and it may not cure the same condition in every person, but there are many examples like the ones above of people being cured. The beauty of the ones above is that I believe they were both cured using cord blood stem cells rather than embryonic stem cells which many express concern about.

    10. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice work...

      Who knew that our country was swimming with fundie sheople? I've been unpleasantly surprised by the clout they've wielded.

    11. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      There's not that many, compared to the rest of us. But their political success (as exploitable shills) shows how even a tiny bit of organization, which is their advantage in their church networks, trumps no organization, which is the case with the rest of us, with respect to the issues (corporate theocracy) they're pushing.

      A tiny little magnet can lift a big pile of iron filings, just because the magnet is highly organized. When it organizes the filings by polarizing the pile, the magnet is in complete control.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    12. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      Well, the American switch to nearly 100% petrol was due more to Prohibition than anything else -- ethanol distillers were outlawed. Though it coincides nicely with a lot of corporate interests.

      As to the parellel with the drug industry, I think it's fairly superficial, and simplifies too greatly where drug discovery has come from. 'Colonial plant medicine formulas' form a very small proportion of drugs, even of drug families. The most famous example being aspirin, which was not colonial, but from a native European plant source. Or most antibiotic families -- sulfa drugs from chemical dyes, penicillins from ubiquitous mold. And regarding petroleum as the source, that has more to do with the fact that most drugs are organic in nature, and petroleum happens to be the cheapest, most plentiful source of hydrocarbons. During the pre-war era, drug technology was not making use of petroleum to any great extent -- though techniques developed at the time in other industries (and in academia) have been of course greatly utilized.

      Finally, the biggest reason I can't buy into your parallelism is that the 'moral' issues of stem cell research are nothing remotely like the social issues facing early cars in Britain. Though I definitely credit the concept of Britain wanting to railroa the world -- after all, they were basing their economic model on the naval superiority model they had until the end of the 19th c.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    13. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      When I was getting my intro to pharmacology in college (no, the premed lectures ;), they taught us that most new drugs (as of the mid 1980s) were discovered through ethnopharmacology (whether acknowledged or not) in underdeveloped countries, then extraction of the "active ingredient", followed by synthesis. Increased industrialization of biodiverse developing areas, particularly tropical, suggests even better access. To your asprin I say "morphine". And even aspirin was part of the basis for the German dominance of 19th Century science, as Bayer synthesized it from petroleum.

      I'd like to see a breakdown of drug origins by source in labs or foreign forests. Not only didn't a 5 minute google gloss turn up any sign of those stats, I also don't trust the IP-manic drug industry to give credit to anyone but their own genius. But I'd like a credible update to my early education.

      It's true that American stemcell inhibitions come covered in morality, while British car inhibitions had no moral basis AFAIK. But I make the point that stemcell morality is a cover for the vested economic interests of the current industry. Though I'm sure British dismissal of cars as supplanting trains and horses was wrapped in similarly selfserving moral rhetoric of some kind. Probably under some version of "socialism" (for or against), the "moral issue" of the day. I'm even less current on the actual British rhetoric dismissing cars while America roared past than I am on pharmalogical discoveries. But I can tell that the economics of the industries are working the same way.

      I'm using the clear parallels to see through the transient wrappings that protect the persistent economic patterns. America is forgoing the stemcell evolution of our medical industry the way the British forewent the car evolution of their transit industry. The tools used to ensure that repetition aren't necessarily the same.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    14. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by iced_773 · · Score: 1


      It's kind of how the Bolsheviks [sp?] finally took over Russia. They had a very organized army, while the opposition, the supporters of a republican (lowercase r) form of government just had some like-minded people thrown together.

    15. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      The Bolsheviks also arrived with railroads, radio, telegraphy, and the discovery of oil across the new Russian vastness. And the US Marines. Funny how those seem to go hand in hand.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    16. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by IDontAgreeWithYou · · Score: 1

      Hyperbolic strawman eh. Well, OK. I am absolutely serious when I say that I am not against stem cell research of any kind. It is still a fact that so far not a whole lot has come of fetal stem cell research. There has been more promising results with cord blood research and adult stem cells. So while maybe I shouldn't have used the word "everybody", it is my opinion that there is way too much optimism over fetal stem cells.

      --
      Finding other idiots on /. that agree with your opinion doesn't make it any less stupid.
    17. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by iced_773 · · Score: 1


      True, but they also murdered millions of their own people. Part of the point I'm trying to make is that if the theocratic hypocrites gain any more power, we may have a culture with more faith in God, but how many people will die in senseless witch trials? How many people with opposing thought will lose their lives in the name of national security and, later, sanctification of a heathen culture? More faith in God indeed, but may God end up losing faith in us?

    18. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Well, of course the millions of people murdered weren't "their own", but rather "their own internal enemies and competition". Russia, Germany, China, Cambodia, Rwanda, Kashmir, Sudan... not too different from the American genocides which predate them, or the African before that.

      All tribalism in the name of ideology for economic gain. There is every reason to expect more, especially in America which has avoided it for centuries. And little reason to believe it won't happen. And ultimately, no reason to believe in god - not the kind people like to believe in, anyway.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    19. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It is still a fact that so far not a whole lot has come of fetal stem cell research.

      Gee, not a whole lot has come from research which isn't well-funded. Funny how that works.

      Guess it's another "Mission Accomplished" for the retarded-right! More science successfully suppressed.

    20. Re:Foreign Investment Opportunities by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      This was discussed at length in my Drug Discovery class at Rutgers College of Pharmacy -- yes, indigenous remedies are often analyzed for active compounds. So are illness trends among local populations -- look at the discovery of the significance of omega-3 fatty acids from studying Inuit populations, or the continuing search for a cancer preventative/suppressant (not just antioxidants) in green tea.

      Here's a link that supports your statement that most NCEs come from or are derived from natural sources.

      I think shortly we'll be seeing more direct analysis of the target site from genome-derived protein info -- this is where US Pharma is looking, IMO, instead of stem cells.

      I do agree that the profit extension of current druglines and methods is a major motive, but the biggest issue I see (and why I no longer work in pharma) is that a cure is worthless to the bottom line. US pharma is business -- big business -- and that is practically it. Individually, many pharma employees are well-meaning, but institutionally, it's a different matter.

      "But I make the point that stemcell morality is a cover for the vested economic interests of the current industry. "

      This is a very important point you make. The whole "conservative" resurgence in the US is based on marrying wedge issues (like stem cell research or abortion or same-sex marriage) to pro-corporate policy. This is a great example of the wedge issue (morality of SC research) being married to the corporate interest (big pharma long-term profits) -- it's very clear because the issues are related. What's the Matter with Kansas treats this subject fairly well, even though it's largely anecdotal.

      Just as an aside, in the long run, I think Britain is far better off for focusing on rail than on autos. The US now finds itself far behind the curve on mass-transit, and the economic costs of the infrastructure are insane now -- nevr mind the cultural problems, like all the NIMBYs who protest trainlines running anywhere near them. Boise ID is a great example -- population projected to double in the next ten years, and the already have gridlock downtown -- yet they voted against a light rail system (involving a short extension from the old freight depot) because of NIMBYism.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  24. Question by DarthChris · · Score: 1

    I've always thought that using organs grown from stem cells is a good idea. But I've also wondered how long it would take to actually grow the organ, and what restrictions this would impose on usage, plus what the inherent limitations are - I imagine this wouldn't be very effective against cancer, for example. Anyone care to enlighten me?

    --
    Don't you just hate it when people reply to your signature?
    1. Re:Question by Dunbal · · Score: 2, Informative

      I imagine this wouldn't be very effective against cancer, for example.

            You are correct. Cancer patients are rarely organ transplant recipients. With a few exceptions, the problem with cancer is not the damage it does to the single organ it affected at the beginning. It's the cumulative effect of the metastases (the other tumors that originated from the primary), all the inflammatory gunk the body produces, and the hormonal/electrolyte imbalances that occurthat ends up killing the patient. Not much point in putting in a new kidney when the lungs and brain are full of little tumors is there?

            This would be great for trauma situations, as well as congenital (hereditary) diseases though.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  25. 5th Day? by RyoShin · · Score: 1

    Does this mean I could have people pilot me in hybrid jets/helicopters while my car drives me home and I can chat with my friend in the near future?

  26. Now In 3D!!! by Doomedsnowball · · Score: 1

    How many Slashdot articles will it take before people are not that impressed with 3D? And isn't it technically incorrect? Shouldn't it be 4D? Real Life! Now in IMAX!!! Please, someone post a article about something more earth-shattering than the conquering of a pesky dimension. It's not like it wasn't in 3D before, it's just a misuse of the language. They should have wrote that they conquered the problem of cell depth, not 3D. Anything but the totally played out 3D.

    --
    7h3$3 4r3n'7 7h3 Ðr01Ð$ ¥0 4r3 £00|{1n9 f0r. M0v3 4£0n9. --OB1
  27. s/30/39/g by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WMF, you fucking idiot.

    1. Re:s/30/39/g by Jherek+Carnelian · · Score: 1

      Time - not pun on 40. Geeze.

  28. Feed the cells by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

    So...just how do these cells stay alive? They need blood to carry the oxygen right?

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
    1. Re:Feed the cells by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Informative

      how do these cells stay alive? They need blood to carry the oxygen right?

            Not really. I'm not a cell biologist, but I have a doctorate in a biology related field (grin).

          Blood is extremely efficient at moving huge quantities of oxygen to a tissue, and getting rid of CO2 and other unwanted byproducts, however tissue does not require such an efficient transport medium all the time. The demands of a cell in a culture where all it has to do is grow, in an ideal liquid medium that is constantly replaced with optimum levels of nutrients, are not all that much, compared to inside the body, where the same cell is made to work (by nervous or hormonal action), is constantly exposed to toxic metabolites from other cells in the area as well as disease. The type of cell that demands most oxygen is the neuron - which is always energy starved. The other tissues (heart muscle, kidney, etc) can make do with a lot less oxygen if it's at rest (the extreme oxygen dependency of the heart is due to the macroscopic design of the organ rather than the tissue itself).

            The human body can exist on nothing but salt water - I've seen it happen in extreme emergency situations where a patient has massive bleeding and not enough replacement blood is available. It's eerie to watch the blood turn from red, to pale pink, to almost transparent, at the bleed site. Usually these patients do not recover so well due to the swelling this causes, rather than lack of oxygen. We are talking about extreme situations and heroic measures here.

            The cell cultures should be ok provided a sterile, isotonic, oxygenated and nutrient filled liquid is pumped through it. The body is limited by the atmospheric concentration of oxygen. Even at 100% efficiency, you can't increase the pO2 of the blood beyond a certain limit. You can do that artificially with 100% oxygen though. It doesn't have to be blood at all.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  29. It's the vessel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    FTA: We have developed a special chamber which is patented with the Bernard O'Brien logo and this essentially is an empty box into which we implant a blood vessel using microsurgery techniques. And this is the link with the microsurgery, that we use microsurgery to create this environment and we mix cells inside this chamber and we let them grow according to the specific environment that we can create.

    I work in a biomedical engineering lab that develops new imaging techniques and we grow tissue phantoms comprised of cells embedded in a collagen matrix - I think they would fit the bill of a 3D cell matrix. Other professors at our university also work to grow neurons, vascular beds, and heart tissue. The difference is that this group can grow the matrix around a blood vessel using their chamber. The vascularization issue is the main problem facing tissue engineers today and their "patented chamber" allows them to bypass the problem, although I do not see this development as a major leap forward. Until tissue can be grown with functional capillary beds, something this group has not managed to do, it can not be incorporated into a working organ for implantation. At best these boxes can be used for research and perhaps in an artificial liver type device. It is interesting to note the beating heart cells, though.

  30. Which brings us to... by Belial6 · · Score: 1

    "At least you know you'd never die."

    Given that the Constitution specifically states that Copyright is for a limited time, we are quickly approaching the 70 years after death as being unlimited.

  31. ...better than one... by flyweight_of_fury · · Score: 1

    I, for one, welcome our two-headed overlords.

  32. Rewrite the post? by Enrique1218 · · Score: 1

    3D? Was this suppose to be a buzzword to get more hits? Gamers must be hugh demographic of the Slashdot audience (ok major "well duh!" moment) Ok, an more accurate way to look at this article is that scientists have created complex tissue from stem cell precursors which is more interesting to those who study biology or medicine or just those who may need organs in the next couple decades. I know that the reporter is not very science oriented but rtfa, and you will realized what the article is all about There are slashdotters among us who will naturally read science articles without all the buzzwords. So, save them for the Vista review articles as you posted too many of them.

    --
    You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
    1. Re:Rewrite the post? by RockModeNick · · Score: 1

      They really should have said multilayer...

  33. slashdot and learning .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you begin learning on Slashdot now, you'll be left the empty carcasse of a child clearly left behind later.

  34. Ahh the prophecy comes true! by revlayle · · Score: 1

    3D HUMAN CELLS now power the Sony PS3 "Evil Incarnate" Edition

    1. Re:Ahh the prophecy comes true! by Shadyman · · Score: 1

      It's people! Spam is made of people!

  35. skin is hardly 2D by ickeicke · · Score: 2, Informative
    only being able to create two-dimensional constructions like skin
    Skin is hardly 2D.
    --
    Firehed - Unfortunately, thanks to medical breakthroughs, common sense is not as common as it once was.
  36. Well thank God for THAT by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    We have to be thankful for this discovery. After all, the old two dimentional cells were completely useless to everyone except for the inhabitants of Flatland, and since the trade embargo, demand for these two dimetional cells has dropped incredibly. But we can all sleep a little sounder knowing that scientists are capable of growing cells that now come with all 3 dimentions. (/sarcasm)

    Or perhaps what they really mean is growing cell CULTURES in 3D? Sheesh, only on slashdot...

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  37. Breasts not 2D, but... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1
    FTA: Now, currently we have been able to make breast tissue...

    There are, of course, not 2d, but Double-D.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  38. Elephant in the Room by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Abortion Debate

    A primary bullet in pro-abortion debates is that the discarded fetus can be used for stem cell research. This study indicates that the teqnique used the donor's own cells.

    1. Re:Elephant in the Room by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      Doesn't mean that technique will work everywhere. And most anti-choicers would rather see the fetus burned than used in medical studies for some unexplicable reason, so it's a moot point anyways.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  39. What really matters in 3D Human cells by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2, Insightful

    1. scaffolding - to build on (e.g. a heart is only useful if it has the correct dimensions and actions)
    2. tissue variation and connections - if it doesn't connect well, and has specialization on the wrong side (e.g. the inside of a tissue is frequently different from the outside - just think of skin cells at various layers
    3. nerves - no nerves in a growth state means we can't knit it together
    4. comparable blood vessels, veins, arteries, capilliaries - for the blood you'll be needing
    5. tissue compatability - this is critical, most organ transplants have major problems in their non-compatability - rejection is not a good thing, this is why everyone looks for the Holy Grail of Cloned Tissue (since it would automatically be compatable)

    Oh, and until we see this done in the lab by three different research teams, it doesn't mean we can do it in real life. Just think of South Korea and their fake-out for why we're so skeptical. Although the canine experiment done there looks like it might be viable, and is therefore an advance.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  40. Finally by HunterZ · · Score: 1

    Finally, we will be able to expand ourselves beyond our meager 2D existence and explore this new, third dimension that we have discovered!

    --
    Arguing about vi versus Emacs is like arguing whether it's better to make fire by rubbing sticks or banging rocks.
  41. This is a breakthrough? by gm0e · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This inkjet printer mod was done over a year ago and accomplished the same thing as far as I can tell.

  42. What the article doesn't say... by CrankyOldBastard · · Score: 2, Interesting
    What the article doesn't mention, is that as well as approving the research grant, Peter Costello also added an additional $300,000AUD from his own funds to the project.

    I don't agree with the Liberal Party's politics. I don't agree with the Economic Rationalism that Costello uses to justify many of his economic decisions as Australia's 2nd most powerful politician.

    But I can't help respecting this man. Imagine what the world could be like if all the filthy-rich politicians were to fund things like this with no strings attached. I will never vote for his party, but if he was a Queensland senator (he isnt) I'd have no problems giving him preferences right behind the party of my choice (the preceding ststement will make no sense for people with pseudo-democratic voting systems, like the US. Oh well!).

    One of the incredibly cool things is that this research didn't rely on Industry Funding, so it's not going to be held for massive profit by some corporation - rather it's going to be "cheap" as stem cell and genomic treatments go.

    Peter Costello, I salute you!

    1. Re:What the article doesn't say... by fido_dogstoyevsky · · Score: 1

      What the article doesn't mention, is that as well as approving the research grant, Peter Costello also added an additional $300,000AUD from his own funds to the project.

      That's interesting - much more what I'd expect from Tim.

      I don't agree with the Liberal Party's politics. I don't agree with the Economic Rationalism that Costello uses to justify many of his economic decisions as Australia's 2nd most powerful politician. But I can't help respecting this man. Imagine what the world could be like if all the filthy-rich politicians were to fund things like this with no strings attached. I will never vote for his party, but if he was a Queensland senator (he isnt) I'd have no problems giving him preferences right behind the party of my choice (the preceding ststement will make no sense for people with pseudo-democratic voting systems, like the US. Oh well!).

      One of the incredibly cool things is that this research didn't rely on Industry Funding, so it's not going to be held for massive profit by some corporation - rather it's going to be "cheap" as stem cell and genomic treatments go.

      Peter Costello, I salute you!


      The rest bears repeating - replace "Queensland" with "Victoria" and I'd agree 100%. Surprisingly to me, even the last paragraph.

      --
      It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
  43. Excellent by raider_red · · Score: 1

    I'll be down at the bar. Please call my mobile when my new liver comes out of the vat.

    --
    It's good to use your head, but not as a battering ram.
  44. Mod Parent Down by ncc74656 · · Score: 1, Informative
    America's 20th Century industry was so obsessed with drugs that it's missing the chance to grow into stemcells. Not just from complacency, but from actually outlawing stemcell research.

    Bullshit. Stem cell research has not been outlawed, and you know it. What has been cut off is federal funding for research that involves the creation and use of new lines of embryonic stem cells. No research has been outlawed. You can still get money from Uncle Sam for research using existing embryonic stem-cell lines. You can still get money from Uncle Sam for research using adult stem cells. If you're not bothered by the ethical implications attendant to creating new embryonic stem-cell lines, you can either fund the research yourself or secure state and/or private funding for your work.

    If you had RTFA, you would've seen that the Australian researchers used adult stem cells. They're doing research that anybody right here in the U.S. could've done (and most likely are doing). That they got there first may end up being a point of pride for them (and rightly so), but there's nothing different about the legal climate here that would've prevented such a discovery.

    I would've recommended that you consider taking a job at Microsoft in their FUD-slinging department, but you're obviously so inept and ham-handed at it that they most likely wouldn't be interested.

    --
    20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    1. Re:Mod Parent Down by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Stemcell research in the US has been outlawed by outlawing its funding. Not all of it - I never claimed all of it. Nor did I claim that the Australian research was embryonic, nor that Americans couldn't get funding to do it. I made a basic point about the actual medical research industry in the US. A point about which you have nothing to say. Certainly nothing based on the truth, logic, or anything I've posted.

      You're the one spreading bullshit. The existing lines are contaminated, and you know it, and the US research community is crimped by the pandering laws. You're parroting the BushCo lies the rest of us have grown tired of hearing. I'd recommend you go fuck yourself, but you'd probably say that's illegal research in the US.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    2. Re:Mod Parent Down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I will not get into a discussion of ethics/morality on the E.S.C. research. I just want to provide you with the factual perspective on the said reseach...

      The U.S. of A. is losing the stem cell race. Yes, we won the space race, the nuke race, IT race, but we will lose the stem cell race. Why? But because there is no company in the World that is capable of providing the funds that the fundamental stem cell research requires.

      Short of a new 'Apollo' program for the stem cell reseach in the US, some other country (currently looks like Korea, Japan, and China) will simply come in, invest, and (eventually) rip the benifits. The U.S. of A. will be delegated to a smoldering ashtray of the 'has-beens' pying for the days of former glory, together with the likes of Yugoslavia, Argentina, the British and the French Empires, etc.

      Why, we don't NEED the government money, you might say! Well... The stem cell research is in its nascient stages; there ARE no stem cell applications at present, NOTHING in the area is even REMOTELY proffitable; we can with confidence claim that without a ca. 1 trillion dollar investment, and perhaps 10 years of research, nothing in the stem cell area will EVER be profitable.

      No company in their right mind can invest that kind of cash (1 trillion) on that kind of timescale (decades), under current kinds of proffit guarantees (basically none; most of the fundamental research cannot be patented/profitted from).

      Exactly like no company was able to invest in nuclear reseach in the 1920's or in rocketry research in the 1930's, the Marshall Plan in the 1940's, or the space exploration program in the 1950s. Unfortunately, this is the one case where the Big Brother has to step in, rough you (and me) up, steal half of our hard-earned money, and give it to the 'useless' research effort.

      Again, if we don't do it, someone else's country will, and ours' will turn into another Argentina. And no, the existing cell lines are just no damn good, adult stem cells are basically a dead end, and the general level of science investment is not sufficient.

      On the bright side, there are signs that the Senate is begining to wake up and realize what exactly is at stake here. It is particularly pleasing to see the arch-consertative Senators talk about things like doubling the NSF science budget, increasing grad. scholarships, and providing automatic visas/green cards for foreign scientists.

    3. Re:Mod Parent Down by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Fortunately umbilical/placental stem cells have been discovered to have as much or more developmental potential than embryonic cells, and are no more difficult to harvest than embryonic cells, so the point it mostly moot.

    4. Re:Mod Parent Down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet there once was some wise European idiot just like you that in 1936 (or so) said: "Fortunately, Radium was discovered by a Polish scientist, so Poland needs not fear a German invasion. Our mighty nukes will protect us!"

      Tough shit, asshole, but we need money, money throught the roof to develop the tech to the point where it could be useful. About the only thing we can do with the human stem cells right now (umbilical, embryonic, adult, or whatever) is shove them up our respective arses!

      You, and the likes of you, are helping America win a Darwin Award on a national scale. I pray you just stick to flipping McBurgers, or trading stocks, or to whatever the fuck it is you do, and leave the voting to those with a clue.

  45. I refuse to believe it! by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 1

    The third dimension is merely an idea from trashy science fiction that has no relevance to reality. What next? People claiming that you can tie knots in pieces of string and that you can enclose a region of space with simply connected surface?

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  46. 3 D cells? by msauve · · Score: 1
    That doesn't do me a bit of good.

    Most of my stuff runs on AA cells.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  47. Isolating adult stem cells by chr1sb · · Score: 1

    One of the big problems with the use of adult stem cells has been the difficulty in obtaining them in large quantities. The Catalyst television show last week described a process that has been developed to efficiently do this. It involves tagging the stem cells using antibodies, and attaching magnetic beads to the antibodies. A magnet is then used to extract the stem cells. In the procedure being described, the stem cells are then injected directly into healthy tissue, with the hopes that they will take on the characteristics of the healthy tissue, and replace nearby diseased or dead tissue. I would expect that the cells can also be used to regrow 3D tissue structures.

  48. Bullshit, this is no first. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Excuse me, I won't spend the time digging up the USA Today article amongst many others, Google would love to do it for you, but I am certain that the bladder that was replaced, completely replaced, within a sufferer of spina-bifida (sp? or other such issues?) would be surprised to hear that her bladder was not, in fact, existing in three dimmensions and she is most likely pissing elsewhere than into the toilet. Come now, we have to do something about our sweet, yet, and for some time now, misled and unthoughtful, Slashdot. Nerds, it is time to unite, tell the kiddies to RTFM and then some, then post logical, researched, and slightly less retarded bullshit.

    In all honesty, I have found myself reading Slashdot lately, after many years, mostly for the wonderful links in the comments by those whom are obviously capable! Do we really need Slashdot for this? I promised myself I would not let this turn into an 'excuse me, web 2.0 has been here since web 1.0 and Tim, not Al or Google first thought it was great' discussion, so I won't, it's rather obvious. Slashdot, you better get your act together, there are only so many wanna be nerds out there, but the CSS is a nice touch. Fuck off, try accessibility, actually, just try to validate. Who the hell do you think you are? Oh, my bad, nevermind, you were bought, sold, bbaughtttt, sssollllldddeee, etc..

    ps. The next script kiddie who thinks ajax is something new and will change the world or mistakes the J for java should be shot just like the shit-heads at microshaft who made the 'keyboard not detected please hit whatever' message. Fuck, I am sick of my once so loved slashdot becoming a haven for people we tell in the news groups, if you know what those are, to RTFM! To think I let the assasin(and you should know who im talking about) allow this shit to come into my boxes, maybe we should build a partial bullshit in the message filter? Anyhow, beer is good, even when not free, code is good, books are good... kids who think they know shit cUZzZ tH3Y r3Ad slashdot are fucking annoying (sorry about the cursing, and yes, that is cursing and not French), especially when they are posting the stories. Sleep tight kiddies, and good luck. You don't know shit.

    To everyone here that has a clue, sorry for the rant. I don't expect a barrage from you, but the kiddies, oh, the unread kiddies, go for it, prove me right. By the way, my secret word, interestingly enough, is RAPTURE. Haha.

    Regards,
    Johnny
    CEO/Creative Director/Resident Architectural Genius
    Your local Microshafter... yeah, right, try F/OSS/We do make money Redhat (sorry deb) superstar.