Slashdot Mirror
Stem Cells Generated From Adult Cells
DrJay writes "Scientist report that introducing only four genes to adult cells is sufficient to convert them to something that looks and acts remarkably like an embryonic stem cell. Although some of the details need to be worked out, if this technique is generally applicable, it may allow the production of an essentially unlimited supply of stem cells. There is a subscription-only report, and Ars Technica's science journal describes the results in some detail for those without subscriptions."
This will help kill some of the controversy if it actually works, but many in America still have an irrational fear of sciences that they do not, and can not, understand. People can understand that taking a pill makes you better even if they do not understand the "how" of the pill. They can understand that cutting into your leg to repair a bone with metal rods makes sense. Very few people, however, understand how stem cells may help medical science. Without helping them understand (politicians included), we still have a long way to go before the public openly accepts stem cell research and is comfortable in pumping large amounts of tax money into the research system.
but.. but.. but.. that cell can turn into a living breathing human being.
Timang tinggi tinggi
parang sudah asah
alang alang mandi
biar sampai basah
How about someone adopt the thousands of kids who are already living and breathing before we go and create more kids.
How about instead of people going to China and Peru to adopt kids, they adopt the ones that are here in this country.
How many kids have you adopted? Until you've adopted at least one, you have no basis to tell women what they can and can't do with their own bodies or prevent them from destroying their own eggs.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
See you can't even READ about it unless you've got money... so it starts...
You're nothing; like me.
The main problem with stem cell research (in the US, mostly) is the moral dimension. This method removes that, and may allow stem cell research to move ahead in the US, although it may be too late. Other countries are less concerned with the moral implications of embryonic stem cells (I believe The Economist had an article about stem cell research in Singapore recently) and are ahead of the US as a result. Can the US catch up fast enough using this method?
There is also the possibility that any stem cell research will be very limited in the US for some time to come, regardless of the method. This is due to the current administration's attitude towards stem cell research, although the attitude may shift with a new administration in '08.
Slow down there. Did you read the link? I am not telling any woman what to do. The website promotes adoption of embryos as a way for infertile couples to still have a child that the woman gave birth to. I agree that there are babies that are already born that need adoption. This is not meant to take the place of that. This is for couples who only wish to have a baby if they can give birth to it themselves.
Your body is made of lots of little parts. Most of your parts are screwed up. These can help make new parts to replace those broken parts. Any questions?
I have nothing to say.
In any case, this is great news. Adult stem cells do not get rejected by the body, unlike the other stem cells that come from a genetically different embryo.
If this technology pans out, then this would both alleviates moral questions, and make for better treatments in one punch.
A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.
I find it amazing that many of the comments here are relatively negative in tone-- that people are still more interested in grousing about the religious right and their ridiculous ethics than they are in celebrating (however cautiously) an advance that may make it possible to reap the benefits of stem-cell research without compromising morals or sacrificing what some consider to be human lives.
This development might offer a way for both sides to win. Should we really be feeling disheartened about that, like "Ugh, what if embryonic stem cells really aren't necessary, and they turn out to have been right all along?"? My impression was that supporting stem cell research was about being pro-science, not anti-religion.
What kind of a douchebag marked the parent Flamebait?
Even ignoring the tedious hyperbole, I fail to follow. I'm a "religious type" who is uncomfortable with stem cell research when it involves the destruction of embryos to obtain the aforementioned cells, and I have been waiting and hoping that eventually, researchers will find a way to produce stem cells without destroying embryos. (Actually, this kind of thing is relatively old news. I seem to recall that other results in the production of stem cells from adult cells have been kicking round for a few months, too.) Funny how the accusation of "fundamentalist!" comes from the narrow-minded secularist who cannot conceive of someone holding consistently to a different moral system. Pot-kettle-black?