Stem Cells ....

[mshheaddoc]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Just got this via my email:


Link

Wednesday, June 21, 2006

National Politics & Policy

Brownback Holds News Conference To Highlight Successes of Adult, Umbilical Cord Stem Cells

Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) on Tuesday held a news conference on Capitol Hill to highlight the contrast between medical successes of treatments from adult and umbilical cord stem cells -- which do not involve the destruction of human embryos -- and the "speculative" prospects for treatments derived from human embryonic stem cell research, CQ HealthBeat reports. Brownback said the 70th peer-reviewed publication showing a medical success from adult stem cells or stem cells from umbilical cord blood will be published this week, and he brought people who had received such treatments to speak at the conference. Brownback said it is important for umbilical cord blood to be stored and for adult stem cell treatment barriers to be lowered so that people do not have to travel outside of the U.S. to receive stem cell treatments. According to CQ HealthBeat, the press conference "countered" one recently held by senators who support embryonic stem cell research (Reichard, CQ HealthBeat, 6/20). Reps. Michael Castle (R-Del.) and Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) and Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) and Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) last month participated in a conference organized by the Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research calling on Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) to bring to a vote a measure (HR 810, S 471) that would allow federal funding for research using stem cells derived from embryos originally created for fertility treatments and willingly donated by patients. Frist last month said he plans to schedule debate this summer on three separate bills involving stem cell research, but he did not stipulate which measures would be discussed. Other pending stem cell measures include a proposal (S 658) sponsored by Brownback that would prohibit human cloning for research and reproductive purposes, legislation (S 2754) introduced by Sens. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) and Specter that would provide funding for NIH to research and create ways to retrieve pluripotent stem cells -- which, like embryonic stem cells, can produce all types of tissues in the body -- without destroying embryos; and a bill (S 1520) sponsored by Feinstein that would ban human cloning for reproductive purposes but not for therapeutic or research reasons (Kaiser Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 5/24).

Forum Participants Discuss Santorum, Specter Bill
In related news, advocates and opponents of embryonic stem cell research on Monday at a forum on Capitol Hill discussed the Santorum and Specter bill, CQ Healthbeat reports. Some researchers, such as Stanford University biochemist William Hurlbut, say that alternative methods to deriving pluripotent stem cells, such as altered nuclear transfer, also could advance the research without causing a moral debate, CQ HealthBeat reports (CQ HealthBeat, 6/19). Altered nuclear transfer involves implanting DNA from a donor's cell into a human egg that has had its nucleus removed and then stimulating the egg to divide. With this technique, scientists could prevent cells from organizing into a human embryo and still harvest embryonic stem cells, according to Hurlbut (Kaiser Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 2/14). However, W. Malcolm Byrnes, a Howard University College of Medicine biochemistry professor, and Catholic University of America professor Jose Granados in a paper wrote that altered nuclear transfer goes through stages that are "indistinguishable from those of a normal embryo," adding, "Could we not say, then, that we have created a defective embryo that is from the outset prevented from developing fully?" In addition, Paul Schenck, director of the National Pro-Life Action Center, said that a Senate vote to fund the measure would "set up a slippery slope and be morally bankrupt ... [and] would be an act of gross negligence." However, Richard Doerflinger, deputy director of the secretariat for pro-life activities at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, said the bill promotes only methods of deriving pluripotent stem cells that do not destroy a human embryo, and if a method such as altered nuclear transfer created a defective embryo, it would not be permitted under the measure (CQ HealthBeat, 6/19).

 

[mshheaddoc]

Its neat for me to see how this issue has come full circle in the past few years. First everyone was against it and now they are finally finding ways to circumvent the morality issues. Although nothing is ever perfect, its nice to see that there are now successful uses for stem cells other than embryonic.

 

[jonathon]

There are roughly 700 diseases currently being treated/researched on in a clinical setting or laboratory setting with the use of adult stem cells. Tremendous success has been seen with the use of umbilical cord blood stem cells.

This is all good and everything, but there is a need for changes in the governmental regulations with the use of stem cell research. I’m not going to take the time to write out a lot of the governmental regulations that need to be changed.

What I find the most interesting with adult stem cell research is neuroregeneration of damaged spinal cords, detrimental cancers, diabetes, heart disease, and the possibility of growing new organs; for example using stem cells from baby teeth to grow bone and growing a patient matched kidney in a laboratory for transplant.

Its neat for me to see how this issue has come full circle in the past few years. First everyone was against it and now they are finally finding ways to circumvent the morality issues. Although nothing is ever perfect, its nice to see that there are now successful uses for stem cells other than embryonic.

 

[angel80]

Its neat for me to see how this issue has come full circle in the past few years. First everyone was against it and now they are finally finding ways to circumvent the morality issues. Although nothing is ever perfect, its nice to see that there are now successful uses for stem cells other than embryonic.

I don't think stem cell research in general was ever an issue. The issue with most religious groups (my own included) has to do with using embryos as a source of the cells, since most of these embryos come from elective abortions. I think it is a huge misconception by the general public that people are dead set against stem cell research, while that is not the case. Adult stem cells have been used clinically for years, and so far, seem to be much more promising than embryonic stem cells.

 

[mediocriskid]

I wouldn't say adult stem cells are more promising than embryonic ones. We just simply do not know enough about embryonic stem cells. Intuitively, embryonic stem cells would be more appropriate considering that they are totipotent vs. adult ones being pluripotent. You also have to look at the egg quality.
A lot of embryonic stem cells being used to conduct research are deemed of poor quality, as in not suitable for implantation. Plus the lines created that are approved by Bush are contaminated.

 

[jonathon]

mediocriskid,

I just wanted to let you know that there are new stem cell lines that have been made by a stem cell company in Madison, Wisconsin. This company has created 2 new cell lines that can be sold at 500 dollars each. These cell lines were not used with any animal protiens.

There was a recent article published in PNAS a couple of months ago, were some researchers were able to trick a percursor epithelial cell and trick it into behaving the same as an embryonic stem cell. This was done by turning off genes that have a specific function for being an epithelial cell and then turning the genes on that are specific for how embryonic stem cells behave. They were able to do the opposite as well with turning the embryonic stem cell into behaving the same as the precursor epithelial cell.

 

[Buckeye(OH)]

Paralyzed rat walks because of stem cells. No seriously, video clip on CNN today, done at Johns Hopkins.

 

[jonathon]

Paralyzed rat walks because of stem cells. No seriously, video clip on CNN today, done at Johns Hopkins.

This is not new. Last year there was a lab that did it on mice.

 

[Haemulon]

I don't think stem cell research in general was ever an issue. The issue with most religious groups (my own included) has to do with using embryos as a source of the cells, since most of these embryos come from elective abortions. I think it is a huge misconception by the general public that people are dead set against stem cell research, while that is not the case. Adult stem cells have been used clinically for years, and so far, seem to be much more promising than embryonic stem cells.

Most embryos available for use in research exist as products from in vitro fertilization. More embryos are produced during IVF cycles than can be implanted (due to a number of reasons). These "extra" embryos are either destroyed or are cryogenically frozen (later to be destroyed if not used). They could be used for research and are not the result of being electively aborted. In fact, they were never established pregnancies to begin with. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Buckeye(OH)]

This is not new. Last year there was a lab that did it on mice.

Oh.

 

[mediocriskid]

Jonathon

Yes, new lines are being created, but they're being created from private funding. Bush has policy that prohibits any federal money from ever being used on non-approved embryonic stem cell lines, which is what all stem cell researchers are complaining about. Most of the 78 approved are contaminated. This translates to if a pipet bought per NIH funding were used on these embryonic stem cells, say bought from this company you mention, you are violating NIH regulations and risk losing all of your funding. Even the electricity used for the lights and computers is subject to an audit. This is why UCSF is having to gut an entire building and furnish it, even with duplicate equipment, with private donations to skirt around this issue.

These precursor epithelial cells would not be the first to exhibit embryonic stem cell behavior. You also have certain teste cells (german group recently discovered this) and that cell type discovered by a group at Duke medical school. So i guess there is potential to avoid this whole ethical issue altogether.

The question is, can you take that precursor epitial cell or any of these other cell types, have it exhibit stem cell behaviour, and then make a different cell type. The answer so far has been "no".

 

[jonathon]

I already know the ins and outs of stem cell funding. I gave a class lecture a couple of months ago about this very topic.

Jonathon

Yes, new lines are being created, but they're being created from private funding. Bush has policy that prohibits any federal money from ever being used on non-approved embryonic stem cell lines, which is what all stem cell researchers are complaining about. Most of the 78 approved are contaminated. This translates to if a pipet bought per NIH funding were used on these embryonic stem cells, say bought from this company you mention, you are violating NIH regulations and risk losing all of your funding. Even the electricity used for the lights and computers is subject to an audit. This is why UCSF is having to gut an entire building and furnish it, even with duplicate equipment, with private donations to skirt around this issue.

These precursor epithelial cells would not be the first to exhibit embryonic stem cell behavior. You also have certain teste cells (german group recently discovered this) and that cell type discovered by a group at Duke medical school. So i guess there is potential to avoid this whole ethical issue altogether.

The question is, can you take that precursor epitial cell or any of these other cell types, have it exhibit stem cell behaviour, and then make a different cell type. The answer so far has been "no".

 

[laboholic]

I never really understood why so many people are against stem cell research. If a family decides that they do not want to keep an embryo, the tube is thrown in a biohazard waste container. I dont see these people out protesting that. Seriously, if I were an embryo (because of course, an embryo is a living person), I would like to at least have the opportunity to grow into a tissue (amongst my siblings in a comfortably warm incubator and periodic snacks of tasty growth factors) - not be dumped in the trash then get incinerated in a huge oven.

 

[Mr. McDuck]

But, people don't think that way. They can't--or don't want to--grasp that concept. I've tried explaining it time and time again, but they just don't want to listen.

As far as treatments, I think the use of stem cells in child leukemia after myoablative therapy to replace the good cells is fascinating. My bro-in-law's dad is actually getting ready to undergo some stem cell therapy for his myeloma.

 

[docB]

If a family decides that they do not want to keep an embryo, the tube is thrown in a biohazard waste container. I dont see these people out protesting that.

Actually many in the right to life movement are also against the destruction of unused embryos. They oppose the use of stem cells from these embryos as well.

 

[tulane09]

As someone who has done considerable research in both Adult and Embryonic stem cell lines and is a self-avowed Christian, I don't see a problem with ESC research funding. What I have a problem with is uneducated wannabe intellectuals like Ronald Reagan Jr and "name your favorite democrat" extolling that ESC's will cure some of the most debillitating diseases in the next ten years if funding is appproved. Not only is this patently wrong, it is cruel to those who suffer from certain diseases. ESC's carry a very great risk of teratoma formation as has been shown in many a research setting. Adult SC's have shown great promise and should be funded with much greater tenacity than is currently done.

 

[Mr. McDuck]

Agreed. If I remember correctly, adult stem cells show some promise in AIDS/HIV research. Why that isn't getting the funding it needs is beyond me.

 

[laboholic]

Actually many in the right to life movement are also against the destruction of unused embryos. They oppose the use of stem cells from these embryos as well.

That makes sense. Do they want all of the embryos implanted and grown to term, or just kept frozen until the end of time?

 

[docB]

That makes sense. Do they want all of the embryos implanted and grown to term, or just kept frozen until the end of time?

I think their feeling is that it's wrong to create embryos that will not be allowed to develop. If you believe that life begins at conception then you would view those embryos as human beings. They are relatively quiet about embryos that are unused and destroyed after in vitro. They are particularly rabid about the idea of embryos being created specifically for harvest of stem cells.