Regenerating Muscle Cells With Newt-Inspired Tech

gmp writes "The NY Times and the Wall Street Journal are reporting on a new paper, published in the science journal Cell Stem Cell, where scientists, inspired by the ability of newts and other lower organisms to regrow lost limbs, have demonstrated that adult mammalian cells can be made to regenerate by suppressing a pair of anti-cancer genes. 'Interfering with tumor suppressor genes is a dangerous game, but Dr. Pomerantz said the genes could be inhibited for just a short period by applying the right dose of drug. When the drug has dissipated, the antitumor function of the gene would be restored. Finding the right combination of genes to suppress was a critical step in the new research. One of the two tumor suppressor genes is an ancient gene, known as Rb, which is naturally inactivated in newts and fish when they start regenerating tissue. Mammals possess both the Rb gene and a backup, called the Arf gene, which will close down a cancer-prone cell if Rb fails to do so.' Is regeneration nature's default, only turned off by our evolved defenses against cancer?"

Comments

We're men....we're men in tights

[Pojut]

"Testicles from a newt...I bet he's a transsexual now!"

Re:We're men....we're men in tights

[Pojut]

I take it you've never heard of Mel Brooks...

Re:We're men....we're men in tights

[Pojut]

Or, if you want me to stay on topic, how's this:

Regrowing lost limbs would be a huge shift...true, an entire industry would grow (haha) out of this technology, but a whole other industry would be put out of business: prosthetics. Not to mention that if prosthetics are knocked out, we may miss out on things like fully-controllable mechanical limbs, which could change the direction the human race goes (do we continue to utilize technology, or do we become technology?)

Re:We're men....we're men in tights

[Rennt]

I don't see how limb regrowth would harm the prosthetic industry.

Just look at the species that do have re-generation abilities. A leg doesn't just spring fully formed from the knee/groin. It would take decades for a human with the same abilities to re-grow an leg. Plenty of room for rehabilitative prosthetics.

Re:We're men....we're men in tights

[ultranova]

Not to mention that if prosthetics are knocked out, we may miss out on things like fully-controllable mechanical limbs, which could change the direction the human race goes (do we continue to utilize technology, or do we become technology?)

We'll become technology. In the long run we'll go far beyond mere cyborgs into full mind uploading. There's far too many advantages to separating your mind from a particular body, the least not being that your intelligence is no longer bound by the amount of brain matter that can fit inside your skull.

He turned me into a newt!

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I got better.

Re:He turned me into a newt!

[__roo]

Meh -- it's only a flesh wound.

Turned me into a new

[sconeu]

So first they turn you into a newt, and then you get better?

Nature's Default?

[jayme0227]

Is regeneration nature's default, only turned off by our evolved defenses against cancer?

I'm not a biologist, but I'd assume that "nature's default" is simply for a cell to reproduce. . Regeneration is far more complex than that. I would expect a need for a coordinated response by the body to ensure that the *right* cells are reproducing. Without that, we'd just be dealing with the tumors those genes are designed to stop.

Re:Nature's Default?

[Yvanhoe]

If the tissue is correctly located, it "knows" into what it should differentiate thanks to morphogens : https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Morphogen These are substances emitted only in specific parts of the body and their concentration at a given place is the hint a cell use to know which kind of behavior it must adopt.

Re:Newt

[Thiez]

I think most slashdotters would like some tail.

Lifespan

[divisionbyzero]

It make sense that newts would have cancer suppressors turned off because they can reproduce and die of other causes before any cancer would kill them and regeneration is likely very handy. Humans on the other hand need to live a fair amount of time to ensure reproductive success and regeneration is likely of less value due to the social supports in human society.

Re:Lifespan

[izomiac]

The 5-6 inch long newts live for 20 years, which is pretty good for such a small animal. The 16 inch long salamanders live for 30 years, while the 5-6 foot long salamanders are thought to live about 80 years. If you have a mammal and an amphibian of similar size, the amphibian seems to have a much longer lifespan

In humans, the liver can regenerate quite well, but liver cancer isn't a leading cause of death. Your skin sloughs off every month and regenerates, yet skin cancer risk follows sun exposure rather than being a ticking timebomb. Peripheral nerves also regenerate, but cancers arising from nerves are quite rare. Therefore, I doubt that regeneration is strongly linked to cancer. If you want stronger proof, the researchers with the p21 knockout mice found no increase in cancer risk, despite the mice being able to regenerate body parts.

Short-hand

[PIPBoy3000]

I believe this is simply short-hand for "selected by evolutionary processes". Even good science writers like to use "designed" on occasion, just like how physicists talk about electrons "wanting" to find the lowest energy state.

Sit! Good boy!

[flahwho]

One problem, the Arf gene tends to make people sniff the ass of people who walk by, leg humping and rawhide chewing.