Opinion: Stem Cell Research - Pros and Cons

[Dattebayo]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Hey SDN,
I'm going to write a paper on stem cells research and just wanted to hear your thoughts about it. I know research covers a wide range and different types of stem cells: iPSCs, adult stem cells, hESCs...

Also, if you guys want to mention any political/economical/social issues, that is fine as well too 🙂

So if you guys could give me some input on what you guys think and some reasoning behind as to why you guys stand by it would be awesome!

 

[cookiemonsters]

Are there still ethical concerns about stem cells? I thought that largely dissipated with discovery of iPSC's.

As for scientific discussions, are there really any cons? Regenerative medicine is the future. I worked in a cardiovascular lab in college and I remember this clinical trial getting a lot of attention http://www.theheart.org/article/1472099.do... basically the researchers were able to regenerate heart muscle after a heart attack by injecting stem cells. Heart muscles don't divide, which is why the heart can't regenerate after a heart attack... they reversed this. Very cool stuff

 

[Lya]

Con: The stem cell research is still in early stage that there are many things we need to figure out, like how to reset the epigenetic memories successfully.

Pro: Nearly unlimited potential. Imagine getting a pill and your damaged organs and extremities regenerate by themselves. No transplant, perhaps not even surgery. If all mental disorders are based on particular arrangements of electrical, biochemical circuits in our brains, then perhaps we could even treat those disorders, especially degenerative diseases.


A real question is, among many other ethical issues, how would you control the population growth of healthy people? What does it mean to have a homogeneous population of people who all have a youthful skin, healthy physical bodies, and so on? A world described in Huxley's Brave New World is certainly possible.

 

[Dattebayo]

I agree with the iPSCs,
but what are your thoughts on utilizing resources in improving the current treatments that are effective now rather than looking into iPSCs or other stem cell research, (because of the tumorgenicity of iPSCs)

I guess what I want to ask is: what about time allocations? do you guys think it's worth it to get into discovering new treatments? Or is it better to focus on improving the treatments that are already effective and improving them?

 

[cookiemonsters]

I agree with the iPSCs,
but what are your thoughts on utilizing resources in improving the current treatments that are effective now rather than looking into iPSCs or other stem cell research, (because of the tumorgenicity of iPSCs)

I guess what I want to ask is: what about time allocations? do you guys think it's worth it to get into discovering new treatments? Or is it better to focus on improving the treatments that are already effective and improving them?

The tumorigenicity of iPSC's is largely erased when the cells are differentiated a little bit further before injecting them into humans. From what I remember, the hierarchy goes iPSC ---> progenitor cell -----> precursor cell -----> differentiated cell. Tumorigenicity is basically eliminated by using progenitor cells.

As for improving current treatments, I guess it depends on the specific of the disease... if something needs to be regenerated, then stem cells are the next big hope. Stem cell treatments will potentially surpass current treatments for things like treating heart attacks. Athletes use them to make broken bones heal faster. But for other diseases (cancer for example?) stem cells would not be useful.

 

[Dattebayo]

ooh i haven't heard about removing the tumorigenicity via progenitor cells!
is it recent?

 

[Lya]

I agree with the iPSCs,
but what are your thoughts on utilizing resources in improving the current treatments that are effective now rather than looking into iPSCs or other stem cell research, (because of the tumorgenicity of iPSCs)

I guess what I want to ask is: what about time allocations? do you guys think it's worth it to get into discovering new treatments? Or is it better to focus on improving the treatments that are already effective and improving them?

Improving existing treatments and discovering new treatments have to be executed concurrently.

When disruptive technologies succeed, although the probability is small, their influences are far larger than incremental improvements of existing technologies. In fact, significant hallmarks in the history of science are often described by major discoveries.

Besides, even if the public believes that investing time and effort in new discoveries is inefficient, there will be always someone driven by curiosity to discover new arenas.

 

[Lya]

But for other diseases (cancer for example?) stem cells would not be useful.

Our understanding in stem cell will definitely help in cancer biology.

I am not sure if we could have things like reverse stem cells where we can have similar mechanisms like apoptosis. I am not sure. Just as poverty and obesity are highly correlated in the U.S, it's possible that regenerative medicine and cancer could be much more relevant to each other than we think.

 

[Dattebayo]

Thank you for your thoughts, and I agree with you that studying regenerative medicine could lead to research breakthroughs in combatting cancer.

However, what are you guys' thoughts about it economically?
is it worth all the money investment?

 

[deleted303591]

I have type 1 diabetes and I am also Catholic.

My family and I support stem cell research, despite the stance of our religion. However, one of the problems is that my body is likely still programmed to kill any islet cells, made by my body or regenerative attempts.

Not only could the regeneration be futile, but stem cell islet cell regeneration could cause a catastrophic autoimmune reaction, without some sort of targeted immunomodulatory and constant treatment.

Personally, I have stronger support and hope for BioMEMs with islet cell encapsulation...

 

[deleted303591]

Thank you for your thoughts, and I agree with you that studying regenerative medicine could lead to research breakthroughs in combatting cancer.

However, what are you guys' thoughts about it economically?
is it worth all the money investment?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Singularity_Is_Near

http://www.kurzweilai.net/?s=Stem+cells&this_exact_wording_or_phrase=&these_words_0=&these_words_1=&these_words_2=&date=anytime&any_of_these_unwanted_words=&v=a

 

[Dattebayo]

I have type 1 diabetes and I am also Catholic.

My family and I support stem cell research, despite the stance of our religion. However, one of the problems is that my body is likely still programmed to kill any islet cells, made by my body or regenerative attempts.

Not only could the regeneration be futile, but stem cell islet cell regeneration could cause a catastrophic autoimmune reaction, without some sort of targeted immunomodulatory and constant treatment.

Personally, I have stronger support and hope for BioMEMs with islet cell encapsulation...

thank you for your input, moco. i was wondering about your condition and how it rejects all islet cells...how common is that in patients? would you happen to have any type of statistics? and is there a term that defines your condition?

 

[Dattebayo]

additionally,
if you were to invest your time and money on a different field of research other than stem cells what would it be? and why would you think it is worth it?

 

[deleted303591]

thank you for your input, moco. i was wondering about your condition and how it rejects all islet cells...how common is that in patients? would you happen to have any type of statistics? and is there a term that defines your condition?

Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disease that results in the destruction of islet cells. Approximately 5-10% of all people with diabetes in the US have type 1 diabetes. About 1 in 400-600 people in the US have type 1 diabetes.

There are four antibodies identified that are associated with type 1 diabetes, that result in the destruction of islet cells.

Type 1 diabetes is not considered to be monogenic. Genes probably come from both parents. In addition 90% of people with type 1 diabetes do not have a relative who has type 1 diabetes. However, if you have type 1 diabetes, you likely have at least one relative that has celiac disease.

Theoretically, if stem islet cells were to be put in my body and were indistinguishable from other body parts, my body might kill the stem cells and could even cause a catastrophic autoimmune reaction. My body is programmed to kill the islet cells again, just how it did 18 years ago when I was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes.

 

[deleted303591]

additionally,
if you were to invest your time and money on a different field of research other than stem cells what would it be?

Nanomedicine/BioMEMs

http://evelynkellyphd.com/pdfs/Nanomedicine1.pdf

and why would you think it is worth it?

BioMEMS will be able to produce materials that can circulate in the bloodstream and repair cells and do various functions. This is estimated to happen and be theoretically possible 20-30 years from now.

BioMEMS is expected to outperform regular biological cells in the human body, someday. Islet cell encapsulation is merely one example of this and is theoretically possible with BioMEMS. Researchers are currently working on such endeavors.

 

[Dattebayo]

Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disease that results in the destruction of islet cells. Approximately 5-10% of all people with diabetes in the US have type 1 diabetes. About 1 in 400-600 people in the US have type 1 diabetes.

There are four antibodies identified that are associated with type 1 diabetes, that result in the destruction of islet cells.

Type 1 diabetes is not considered to be monogenic. Genes probably come from both parents. In addition 90% of people with type 1 diabetes do not have a relative who has type 1 diabetes. However, if you have type 1 diabetes, you likely have at least one relative that has celiac disease.

Theoretically, if stem islet cells were to be put in my body and were indistinguishable from other body parts, my body might kill the stem cells and could even cause a catastrophic autoimmune reaction. My body is programmed to kill the islet cells again, just how it did 18 years ago when I was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes.

Forgive my lack of knowledge if I am wrong, but does that mean that BioMEMs has the potential to function the same as stem cells and exceed them? I guess I am wondering what the difference is between BioMEMs and stem cells are. I quickly skimmed through your link though.
Additionally, depending on your answer as to how effective BioMEMs are (my next question is IF they do not have the same function as stem cells) is it worth (as in respective to the whole world population, not saying that your illness should be disregarded) researching into BioMEMs if it affects 5-10% of the population?

I hope my questions make sense and thank you for your invaluable input! it's been very helpful for me to not only use but I am learning more from you!

 

[deleted303591]

Forgive my lack of knowledge if I am wrong, but does that mean that BioMEMs has the potential to function the same as stem cells and exceed them? I guess I am wondering what the difference is between BioMEMs and stem cells are. I quickly skimmed through your link though.
Additionally, depending on your answer as to how effective BioMEMs are (my next question is IF they do not have the same function as stem cells) is it worth (as in respective to the whole world population, not saying that your illness should be disregarded) researching into BioMEMs if it affects 5-10% of the population?

I hope my questions make sense and thank you for your invaluable input! it's been very helpful for me to not only use but I am learning more from you!

I will try to follow up on BioMEMs (and Nanomedicine) vs. Stem Cells soon, in a future post.

BioMEMs has a wide variety of applications, and according to a futurist, Ray Kurzweil, they are expected to be circulating in our bloodstreams, repairing cells, within 20-30 years. This is from the book, The Singularity is Near. About 86% of his predictions is a PREVIOUS book, were proven to be accurate, although interpretation is sort of subjective. So, considering all of the above, and the fact that such technologies may be circulating in our blood streams, probably outperforming the typical biological cell, this would be financially worth it.

Type 1 diabetes consists of only 5-10% of diabetics in the US.

An application of BioMEMS would be islet cell encapsulation. Ctrl +F and enter "islet cell" to search (Command + F and enter "islet cell" to search on Mac) http://www.ece.umd.edu/class/enee719f/papers/Grayson-Implantable%20Review.pdf

____________________
(page 4) One area in which MEMS technology may offer significant improvement over the current state of the art is that of immunoisolation. Traditionally, polymer-based capsules are used for implantation of cells [74] in an attempt to prevent immunorejection. Semipermeable immunoisolation capsules are used, for example, to isolate implanted islet cells from the surrounding biological environment, while allowing the cells to remain viable and secrete insulin for treatment of diabetes.
____________________

 

[deleted303591]

Forgive my lack of knowledge if I am wrong, but does that mean that BioMEMs has the potential to function the same as stem cells and exceed them? I guess I am wondering what the difference is between BioMEMs and stem cells are. I quickly skimmed through your link though.
Additionally, depending on your answer as to how effective BioMEMs are (my next question is IF they do not have the same function as stem cells) is it worth (as in respective to the whole world population, not saying that your illness should be disregarded) researching into BioMEMs if it affects 5-10% of the population?

BioMEMS can be used in tissue engineering alone. However, stem cells (whatever type is suitable) can be used in conjunction by regulating the stem cells. This would provide optimal results. One example (of several) would be encapsulation of islet cells in type 1 diabetes, for immunoregulation.

Please read the paragraphs with islet cell in them. Ctrl +F and enter "islet cell" to search (Command + F and enter "islet cell" to search on Mac) --I already put a link to this article in a previous post. http://www.ece.umd.edu/class/enee719f/papers/Grayson-Implantable%20Review.pdf

I doubt stem cells of any sort can be useful without technological advances such as BioMEMS, as uncontrolled growth can occur from stem cells, leading to cancer. Some sort of countermeasure needs to be present with such a permanent foreign body or tissue--even if indistinguishable from other parts of the body--is placed, for a variety of reasons.

A great overview of the promise BioMEMS offers can be read here. Please read the entire article (although the beginning is strange, especially if you have not read any books by Ray Kurzweil). Human Body Version 2.0.

The above article gives you a good overview of applications and demonstrates the potential cost benefit, although cost is not mentioned.

I also found this journal article covering cost and BioMEMS. (press ctrl + f to search for "cost"--Command + F "cost" on a Mac) http://www.ece.ubc.ca/~kcheung/pub/kcheung-SSE-2006.pdf

However, searching for "cost benefit analysis" AND "stem cell research", etc. did not bring up any useful results.

I hope this helps.