Slashdot Mirror
23 Seriously Ill MS Patients Recover After 'Breakthrough' Stem Cell Treatment (telegraph.co.uk)
schwit1 quotes a report from The Telegraph: Multiple sclerosis patients who were severely disabled are walking, working and even downhill skiing again following a breakthrough therapy which completely destroys, then rebuilds, the immune system. The trial, which is the first in the world to show complete long-term remission from the debilitating disease has been hailed by experts as "exciting" "unprecedented," and "close to curative." Although it is unclear what causes MS it is thought that the immune system attacks the protective coating which surrounds nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord leading to inflammation, pain, disability and in severe cases, early death. [The new technique, which is a treatment usually used to fight leukemia, involves using chemotherapy to entirely eradicate the damaged immune system, before rebooting it with a transfusion of bone marrow cells. Out of the 24 patients who were given the treatment at least seven years ago, the majority have seen significant improvements. 70 per cent of patients saw a complete stop to the progression of the disease, while 40 per cent saw a reversal in symptoms such as vision loss, muscle weakness and balance loss.] Last week, it was reported that a wheelchair-bound stroke victim was able to walk again after an "unprecedented" stem cell trial at Stanford.
It's been getting some coverage in the right-wing media, where it's being gleefully spun as proving that embryonic cells are useless and only dumb liberals would waste their money on research with them.
Everything is politics. The nature of the hyper-partisan nature of US political culture: There is nothing that cannot be spun into supporting one of the two major factions. Sometimes both spin it to their own ends.
But it's going to be a while before you can do this in your local community hospital.
Yep, better to die than to take the risk of dying. Current FDA body-count estimate is up to 2 Nazi Holocausts - when people believe they can achieve risk avoidance, they completely fail at risk management.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Please tell me what level of risk one should accept for diagnosis and treatment of annoying but largely manageable deceases like Chron's, UC, etc?
It should be the level of risk acceptable to the informed and consenting individual patient, not the level of risk acceptable to a government bureaucrat. Many of these diseases may not be directly fatal, but they can destroy a person's quality of life to the point they feel their life is not worth living, so they may be willing to take a substantial risk for a cure. Nobody should have the right to veto that decision.