Slashdot Mirror
"Miraculous" Stem Cell Progress Reported In China
destinyland writes "In China's Guangdong Province there's been 'almost miraculous' progress in actually using stem cells to treat diseases such as brain injury, cerebral palsy, ataxia and other optic nerve damage, lower limb ischemia, autism, spinal muscular atrophy, and multiple sclerosis. One Chinese biotech company, Beike, is now building a 21,500 square foot stem cell storage facility and hiring professors from American universities such as Stanford. Two California families even flew their children to China for a cerebral palsy treatment that isn't available in the US. The founder of Beike is so enthusiastic, he says his company is exploring the concept of using stem cells to extend longevity beyond 120 years."
Say what you will about the Chinese, but we could still learn a thing or two from them. At least they have the guts to try this stuff.
If true, this might, trigger a reaction in USA, like the launch of Sputnik by USSR did back in 1957. Suddenly science will be "in" again and it will shake America from its lethargy, self absorption and provide some kind of common unifying goals.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Finding fraud in China: As Chinese research expands, who is looking out for faked results?
I don't want to come off as more racist than I already do or anything, but the last few miraculous discoveries in China were faked.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I don't want to come off as more racist than I already do or anything, but the last few miraculous discoveries in China were faked.
You're not coming off as racist. That's a cultural observation, and it's entirely appropriate.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
I am not an expert on this in any way. However I would expect Adult Stem Cells from the same patient would make more compatible fixes vs. Embryonic cells from a different genetic group.
If I were to regrow a bone for my finger with Stem Cells I would expect mine to more closely match the one I loss, and would be accepted by my body better.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
I guess it's going to be a true test of ideals as Republican conservatives move to block stem cell research ... as they approach age 75.
This is why there will probably be genuine life extension, because the elderly and soon-to-be elderly in our society control so many resources.
Once there is an upsurge in life extension, this should be followed by an upsurge in curing cancer. Why? Because if you extend the lifespan of a mammal long enough, it's going to die of cancer.
http://www.sens.org/
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/aubrey_de_grey_says_we_can_avoid_aging.html
It always is, any time you hear about Stem Cells cured x, y, z. It was adult SC.
The fist treatment that actually uses embryonic SC is scheduled later this year.
I really wish people would stop acting like we are so far behind because of Bush he only stopped research on embryonic not adult.
I'm pretty sure the poster mean when the experimental results are replicated independently by another lab.
Also, stem cells replicate relatively infrequently. Replication results in minor DNA damage, so the body keeps the source of new cells in as pristine a condition as possible by minimizing stem cell replication. One of the two new cells chills out until needed again while the other replicates as many time as is necessary.
That's actually one of the major concerns for adult stem cells. Taking cells from an adult, which has already endured a lifetime of genetic damage, and using them for a stem cell line is begging for some cancers to pop up. All the nastiest cancers known to man originate from stem cells. Fetal stem cells have the benefit of being the most pristine stem cells you can get.
It's destruction of embryos.
While technically true, the term "embryo" can be misleading: it could lead some to think that the thing being destroyed is something close to a fetus---i.e., something with a central nervous system and a beating heart. But typically, "Embryonic stem cell research" only involves the destruction of a blastocyst. We're talking about a tiny cluster of cells that has *no neurons*. (If left to grow into a late-stage embryo then some of the cells in a blastocyst will have been the *distant ancestors* of the first neurons.)
And the anti-ESCR crowd objects to said destruction because...well it's not clear. I gather that some of them think a "soul" is injected into a zygote at the moment of its formation. (Of course, the meaning of that sentence hinges on what you think a "soul" is, and I rarely get a satisfactory definition out of religious types.)
But if there is such a thing as a human soul---loosely defined here as the mind of a person---then findings in neuroscience seem to suggest that a human soul is something generated by a human brain. In that case a common housefly would have greater capacity to bear a soul than a blastocyst, because at least a housefly has a brain!
So while I recognize that the anti-ESCR crowd has some deep emotional feelings about this, I also feel that the respect paid to them by policy-makers was not earned legitimately. How could it have been? The foundation of their argument is superstition.