Slashdot Mirror
First Embryonic Stem Cell Clinical Trial Imminent
An anonymous reader writes "California-based Geron has announced that the first embryonic stem cell trial may be in the not-so-distant future. Tom Okarma, Geron's CEO, recently announced that the company will be seeking permission from the FDA to begin clinical trials. From the article: 'Geron's plan is to treat people that have acute spinal injuries with oligodendrocyte progenitor cells grown from human ESCs. Oligodendrocyte cells support neurons in the brain and spine by sheathing them in myelin, a fat that helps neurons to transmit signals.'"
Doesn't alcohol inhibit the brain's ability to pass information between the neurons? Though I know the study is not designed for this, it'd be interested to see if the additional 'signal boost' allowed for cells to overcome the added resistance. 2015: More beer, less drunk
...there's nothing to sheathe here.
(I'm sorry.)
"I seem to have mastered a certain amount of control over physical reality."
I, for one, welcome our god playing doctors.
I believe this was the result of propostion 71 that was passed in California last year. It allocated $3 billion over a period of ten years to fund stem cell research! Way to go California :)
http://religiousfreaks.com/ http://psychicfreaks.com/Personally, I think we should just cut to the chase and start growing humans specifically to harvest the organs. Why not? As long as they don't achieve consciousness, what's the harm?
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
Unless know of a manner in which you can transplant a spinal cord from one human to another.
For example, will this lead to a cure for MS?
What do you eat? (Assuming that you consider animals and plants alive)
But seriously, this can set up some pretty interesting dilemmas, assuming you value highly the life of both, say, a sick child and a fetus (even ASSUMING that the stem cells come from fetuses). Even if you value them equally, there's no reason to make such a decision in favor of the fetus by default. Either way you're killing something.
But what I'm really afraid of is that, despite whatever scientific significance such a trial could have, the religious right will immediately jump on this and squelch it without giving it any sort of chance. At least, hopefully, we can get the scientific advances later from countries that are more willing to do the research.
http://www.TheGamerNation.com/Forums
With the babyboomers being the first generation (in history) to be at the threshold where science and technology is unlocking the secrets of how cells work and with the increased competition, it is no longer simply okay to accept that when you reach your early 40's that you can be let go because there are younger workers able to do your job (simply because you suffer fron the what is now "natural" aging process)
t ransfer pills and much like todays generation (with ipods, pc's,internet etc.) not be able to imagine a time when this technology did not exist.
With these new upcoming technologies (stem cells, bio/nanotech) we will be able to, in the next couple of dacades, to slow and reverse the aging process so that in this competitive world enviroment, you won't be tossed out on the junk heap when you reach 40.
The only way this is going to happen is for people to push science and technological research forward and demand that this be done (instead of, say invading other countries).
Remeber, in the future, when we can reprogram cells and easily as we write programs today, people growing up will be taking their nano-reguvination/enhaced intelegence/memory/internet-connect-mind-thought-
Sure that's a third eye on your elbow, but it's a feature, for free too.
"Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
Cohen
I hope there is some catalyst that causes a much larger wave of biological research. I want to see "Smart Pills", "Strong Pills" and "Anti-Aging Pills" all with little or no side-effects in my lifetime, I feel like we could have these things if we weren't so concerned with curing the symptoms of diseases as we currently are. I know that our pharmacological community is more concerned with making a buck and keeping us sick then actually curing diseases. I hope that soon enough something is done to halt the concentration on frivilous medical research. Whether it be heavy subsidies to pharmaceutical companies, or offering up huge cash incentives to finding a cure, I just would like to see us move into a future where some of the basic human ailments have been conquered. We as humans have managed to conquer (or destroy as you may have it) our environment to the point of being able to genetically engineer our own food, so it seems ridiculous that we can't have a better understanding of our own body.
Meet new people, and kill them.
Hopefully the programmers are better than the current OS programmers. I know I wouldn't let Linux or Windows control me.
My fellow republicans, it is time we got out our pitchforks and torches. The mad scientists are going too far, and frankly, I think we all know we're overdue for some lynchings. God didn't put us on this earth to suck cells out of unborn babies to heal the sick, but he gave us fire for good reason, and it is time we used some of it!
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
An interesting example is as follows:" A fluorescence-activated cell sorter. A cell passing through the laser beam is monitored for fluorescence. Droplets containing single cells are given a negative or positive charge, depending on whether the cell is fluorescent or not. The droplets are then deflected by an electric field into collection tubes according to their charge. Note that the cell concentration must be adjusted so that most droplets contain no cells and flow to a waste container together with any cell clumps."
The empirical scientists that correctly implement such challenging procedures are rarely mentioned.
"Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
Cohen
can't we have one discussion here that doesn't compare microsoft to a disease?
What in the world do you eat? Do you survive off of just a salt lick or something?
I think this is big and could lead to more trials. I definitely this was a positive result from California's prop 71. Let's hope it gets the bill stuck in Congress passed. I just posted a summary of this and other relevant stem cell science news dating back to December '04 on my blog, http://bensstemcellnews.blogspot.com/ You'll see a lot of advancements are being made. And check out a TV spot I was in for prop 71 called "Twins." If anyone wants to link to me or me to link to them, let me know!
thats what Agent Smith thought, and we all know how that turned out..
And test it simultaneously with other types of stem cells (like ones found in the stomach of an adult.) That way, we can see what the differences are between normal stem cells and embryonic stem cells. This way, naysayers of whichever side of the debate will have hard evidence to (support, oppose) their claim and settle things.
If the embryos never achieve consciousness, there's nothing wrong in my eyes with creating them to harvest stem cells. They'd never have grown into fully developed babies anyway.
I got my protest sign ready. ESC Research is inhuman and immoral.
Will someone please think of the young babies?
whenever people say competitive world environment, i wonder if they are aware of who is enforcing its competitiveness.
Um, right. So because some people (you) don't like some aspects of the cycle of life, the rest of us must reject it also?
Oh yeah, Cancer is not a death sentence. Life certainly is, though.
But with Linux, you'll be able to edit your DNA as you see fit. Join the OpenGene Revolution!
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
And with enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow. So just edit your DNA to give yourself a thousand eyeballs, and it should be bug free!
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
And with enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow. So just edit your DNA to give yourself a thousand eyeballs, and it should be bug free!
:-)
Ehmmm, yes. One word: shampoo. In all 1000 eyeballs at once. Enjoy
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
A couple of years ago, I developed sciatica (which presented literally as a pain in the a**). Sciatica is an irritation of the sciatic nerve, which is about as fat as a finger and snakes from the spine through the hip to the leg. While some sciatica comes from collapsed discs, mine was a result of trying to train to quickly for a marathon and so damaging the myelin sheath. After surveying the available options (surgery, drugs, sleeping with a special pillow strapped between my knees) I decided to give lecithin a shot. It's an all-purpose bio-lube good for your heart, hair loss, etc. Also, it is cheap, natural, available over the counter, and non-toxic (your body burns off any excess as food). It worked for me. The science is out there (e.g., http://www.jcb.org/cgi/content/abstract/68/3/480) but don't expect to hear much about it because nobody is going to make money off lecithin. It comes from soy beans. A big bottle is just a couple bucks.
Other segments? Are little specs of goo with no nervous system and less interactive personality than a lab rat, a "segment of society?"
If Yes, then I guess I see the point.
But I see the hypothesis as absurd. No segment of society is being used here, no one is suggesting that some underclass be abused (which would be of alarming concern), so there is no scary risk here.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Why are people ignoring adult stem cell advancements? Helping the paralyzed to walk, curing type 1 diabetes in mice, pushing various types of cancer into remission, and helping cirrosis of the liver, amongst others. They've also been able to take strands of hair from burn victims, take the stem cells from the follicles (left on the tip of the strand), and grow skin flaps to be used in place of skin grafts.
Meanwhile, you have embryonic stem cells which they tried in patients with Parkinson's. Disaster. According to the results, they had tics, couldn't stop chewing... the cure was worse than the disease! Or the monster tumors, where injected embryonic stem cells turn into a large mass of hair, skin, and bone... inside the person.
Why do so called objective scientists ignore actual advances in one area for potential in another area? Why ignore the real and rational?
Segue. The word you're looking for is segue. The Segway is that silly motorized scooter (although it is spelled the way segue is pronounced).
... You can say "any homo sapien organism" but people seem to prefer "whenever it looks human and we suppose it might have some level of intelligence" (which actually takes quite a while to develop).
Anyhow, I personally would start by drawing lines saying "don't kill people" and "don't torture people" (which would include a concept of "informed consent" for those who choose to participate in medical testing).
The real trick is the definition of "people"
Dr. Mengele?
That is, the first US clinical trial. That would be, oh, decade behind the rest of the world?
The first human stem cell clinical trials were done in the early 80's on the "frozen addicts", who got instant Parkinson's from a bad batch of home made fentanyl (see "The Frozen Addicts" by Palfreman and Langston). The first and worst case was mostly cured in a matter of weeks.
To respond to an early reply re: "smart pills". The first one was patented so long ago the patent has expired. It was invented by Albert Hoffman. He's remembered for inventing LSD, but he deserves a Nobel for inventing nootropics.
Speaking of Nobels, Eric Kandel (who got it for his work on dopamine) has started a company intending to invent the world's first smart drugs. How can this be, if it's already been done? Same excuse for the inaccuracy about the first stem cell trials: the originals weren't done in the US.
The stem cell stuff, that's sheer US arrogance and ignorance. The smart drug stuff has an even worse excuse. The patent was wholly owned by Sandoz of Switzerland, and no US pharma company could make or sell it, so the FDA wouldn't approve it despite the fact that it was one of the safest (ie. no interactions, side effects generally beneficial such as regulating high blood pressure) drugs invented.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
ESC research is essential and vital.
Won't someone please think of the vi users?
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?