Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

First Embryonic Stem Cell Clinical Trial Imminent

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the human-guinea-pig dept.

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.'"

11 of 224 comments (clear)

  1. Alcomohol by l5rfanboy · · Score: 1, Interesting

    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

  2. babybooms, as we age, will need these technologies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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)

    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-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.

  3. Move Further... by eieken · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:Move Further... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      A good example of the priorities of a pharmaceutical company is today's story in the Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/medicine/story/0,,179977 2,00.html about a drug developed by Genentech, Avastin, which is effective against colon cancer. Genentech has a winner and will make a good profit on it. Then ophthalmologists realised that minimal doses of the same drug can also prevent blindness caused by macular degeneration, a disease of old age for which there was no effective treatment. But Genentech does not want to license the drug for this use as it is. No sir, they will only sell a 'repackaged' version for 100X the original price. A real 'eye opener'.

    2. Re:Move Further... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      "But will Genentech offer this option?"

      That's the point. It's not up to Genentech. Within reason, doctors can choose the drug they give their patients.


      It is up to them in the sense that Genentech could apply for a licence for use of Avastin in wet macular degeneration, just like they decided to do for Lucentis. As mentioned before, initial results are very positive. While doctors can always go for 'off label' usage, this has important economic implications re availability within the NHS (i.e.: paid by the taxpayer vs paid as a private patient), as explained in the Guardian article. It might be irrelevant in the US, I don't know the system over there.

      numbers you're clearly pulling out of your ass. (Avantis is about $300 per shot.)


      It was clearly intended as a hypothetical example, since there are no results from such a trial, but the prices are taken from the article and converted at a rough rate of 2 dollars to 1 pound. Checking the rate today it should have been $1.85 to £1. They say in the article that one shot of Avastin is enough to treat dozens of patients with macular degeneration.

      It is not an "antibody", however. An antibody is a protein created by white blood cells that attach to and neutralize antigens.


      You are using a restrictive and somehow pedantic definition of antibody. For instance, many antibodies do not neutralize antigens. And although 'natural' antibodies are made by B lymphocytes, these days there are other possibilities, too. Anyway Genentech's website says: '...Lucentis is an antibody fragment...' and they should know.

      A few years back, Genentech was just about betting the farm on Endostatin and Agiostatin which turned out to have less than glorious results. It damn near put them out of business. The fact that they've had a few winners has helped to strengthen them, but companies are always at risk of having bad luck with their new drugs and it could knock them back a few years in earnings.

      I'm not trying ot say drug companies can't do better, can't make some drugs available for less money, and can't be a little more humanitarian in their approach, but how does this make drug companies different from any other company? With few exceptions, most businesses are out there trying to make as much money as they can.


      You see... Genentech has done a lot of good work which I really respect. I am delighted that Avastin is a success. Incentives are important. It's just that the Avastin/Lucentis story is a good example of the priority conflicts that may arise in this domain. No big deal, we just need to be aware and tell them when the greed is showing too much.

  4. Re:My fellow republicans ... by hasbeard · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Please remember that I am not the one who made the "Mengele" comment. However, didn't you say that you wouldn't draw any lines? Are you now saying that there are lines you wouldn't cross?

  5. Re:Overlords by jbreckman · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Then how do you explain that a considerable number of pregnancies end in "spontaneous abortions"? A great deal of perfectly viable embryos just don't survive.

    here: http://www.physorg.com/news67783446.html
    or, a site you trust: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jun/06060508.html

    According to the second site there, only 10-15% of preganncies "spontanteous abort", "Ninety percent of all such abortions are due to rejection of a maldeveloped embryo or fetus".

    That means 1%-2% of healthy babies are naturally aborted for no reason.

    If God considered every embryo that important, and I'm assuming you think this to be more or less under his control, he would make sure that the viable embryoes lived.

    I don't believe in God, but I respect people that do. The problem I have with this situation is that people like you are attempting to stop my friends and family members from getting the treatment that could be possible.

  6. Re:My fellow republicans ... by hasbeard · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Hypothetical question: what happens if one day they discover a therapy that will cure MS? The problem is that it requires the pituatary glands of 70 year old humans? Will we then say, "Well, these people have lived most of their lives already, they are of little further "usefulness," so why not harvest what we need? Could anyone see this happening?

  7. Re:My fellow republicans ... by Gnostic+Ronin · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I'm kinda mixed about this. I can see the point -- that we could end up saying that certain other segments of society are of more use as body parts, thus we can kill the elderly or the retarded or comatose. Think of all the organ "donations" (for example) that we could get by merely taking the demented 95 year olds out of nursing homes. And frankly, from a purely scientific standpoint, there's no reason that we couldn't get useable organs that way. But when it comes to morals, it's a horrible thing to do. Something that should be inconceivable, even though it would work.

    On the other hand, this technology could save thousands of lives. We could regrow body parts, replace dead brain cells and so on. The blind could see, the deaf could hear, the lame could walk. We could extend lifespans past 100 to maybe 120. who knows.

    I wish there was a way to get stem cells without killing embryos. I don't know that adult cells can do the same or not.

  8. Re:Overlords by KDR_11k · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I would think freedom gives life, rather than takes it away.

    Nope. Freedom does not give life but it makes life worth living. We'd probably live much longer if we took away our freedoms of deciding what to eat (replacing it with a health plan that has been tested thoroughly to guarantee maximum health) or to drive cars individually (enforcing use of public transportation instead, which of course would be more developed in such a scenario). Giving up guns would reduce the number of gun-related deaths, banning all unhealthy substances (including alcohol and tobacco) would increase health, surveillance everywhere would greatly reduce crime.

    How much happiness and joy has abortion really brought to anyone?

    If the mother wants to get rid of the child she'll get rid of the child. I'd rather have a surgeon do that with the appropriate tools before the "child" is alive than the mother doing that with a tyre iron when the child is crying too much. Even if the mother does not kill the child she can (willingly or unwillingly) cause severe psychological damage to an unwanted child.

    What does it say about us that we see unborn children as a potential medical resource instead of a precious humnan life?

    Well, it's still better than the lion who kills other lion's babies in order to get laid.

    --
    Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  9. Lecithin, Myelin & Sciatica by Geosota · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.