Posted on 09/28/2005 8:30:45 PM PDT by pending
Paraplegic breakthrough using adult stem cells
Apparent major breakthrough with patient paralyzed 19 years Posted: September 28, 2005 1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
In an apparent major breakthrough, scientists in Korea report using umbilical cord blood stem cells to restore feeling and mobility to a spinal-cord injury patient.
The research, published in the peer-reviewed journal Cythotherapy, centered on a woman who had been a paraplegic 19 years due to an accident.
After an infusion of umbilical cord blood stem cells, stunning results were recorded:
"The patient could move her hips and feel her hip skin on day 15 after transplantation. On day 25 after transplantation her feet responded to stimulation."
Umbilical cord cells are considered "adult stem cells," in contrast to embryonic stem cells, which have raised ethical concerns because a human embryo must be destroyed in order to harvest them.
The report said motor activity was noticed on day 7, and the woman was able to maintain an upright position on day 13. Fifteen days after surgery, she began to elevate both lower legs about one centimeter.
The study's abstract says not only did the patient regain feeling, but 41 days after stem cell transplantation, testing "also showed regeneration of the spinal cord at the injured cite" and below it.
The scientists conclude the transplantation "could be a good treatment method" for paraplegic patients.
Bioethics specialist Wesley J. Smith, writing in Lifesite.com, expressed enthusiasm about the apparent breakthrough, but also urged caution.
"We have to be cautious," said Smith, a senior fellow at the Seattle-based Discovery Institute and a special consultant to the Center for Bioethics and Culture. "One patient does not a treatment make."
The authors of the study note, writes Smith, that the lamenectomy the patient received might have offered some benefit.
"But still, this is a wonderful story that offers tremendous hope for paralyzed patients," he said.
The fact that the patient has a very old injury, Smith added, makes the results even more dramatic.
Smith said he has known about the study for some time, "but because I didn't want to be guilty of the same hyping that is so often engaged in by some therapeutic cloning proponents, I waited until it was published in a peer reviewed journal."
Like most breakthroughs using adult stem cells, this one has been completely ignored by the U.S. mainstream media, Smith pointed out.
"Can you imagine the headlines if the cells used had been embryonic?" he asked.
Bizarre that there hasn't been a peep over here in the US media (other than WorldNetDaily)
bump for the good guys
I will try to find the links. Our media doesn't want to talk about it. Here in PA, PITT made the news for it's work in the area of adult stem cells. Stanford, the Univ of Hawaii and one other one in particular. I have an early morning and it's late, but I will find the links. Work is being done and it's promising and less scary than the work being done with fetal stem cells. That work had scary side effects.
So, let me get this straight. We can use umbilical cords instead of killing babies to get these stem cells? Hmmm.... I seem to remember hearing this before. Oh yeah, I'VE BEEN SAYING THIS FOR NEARLY 5 YEARS!!!!! Christopher Reeves apparently didn't want to get better since he didn't move to New Zealand where he could have used umbilical cord stem cells all the live long day.
"The authors of the study note, writes Smith, that the lamenectomy the patient received might have offered some benefit."
There`s always something stuck in these articles like this.
I hope this is more than just hype. Umbilical cord blood stem cells don`t require the death of a child, but a birth. : )
Isn't that the truth! I've heard of a story with fat cells as well, and heaven knows, the US alone has a supply of that! I will find those links, which I'm sure you're well aware of, for Pitt and the other study.
Wow. Need to hold onto this one. Future reference bump.
runaway bride
Wendy's chilli w/finger
Dan Rather's memo
According to most media: If it didn't happen in NY, it didn't happen.
Here is a Slashdot thread on the post.
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/28/1943224
Read the comments (warning: the general run of Slashdot commenters tend to be young, left-wing, and not too bright, with limited vocabularies that cause them to repeat the same profanities at length. However, there are many worthwhile technologists on that site).
Among the treasures amongst the generally obtuse comments is a link to the article abstract.
There is one fact omitted from the WND report. While the patient got the umbilical-cell treatment, she (a 37 year old female, paraplegic at 10th thoracic vertebrae x 19 years) also received a laminectomy (having the spinal cavity in the vertebra opened up) at the same time. Historically, a laminectomy has not produced this kind of result.
This blogger seems informed (I got his blog address from the slashdot thread, but this is the exact post on this):
http://www.wesleyjsmith.com/blog/2005/09/umbilical-cord-blood-stem-cells-treat.html
If you read that, you might like Smith's blog. I did and bookmarked him for regular reading. Among other observations in his blog, he notes that when New Jersey made a bucket of money available for stem cell research "since the feds don't fund it," all requests for grants but one were for adult or umbilical cell research -- and the one exception wasn't for a research project, but for a training project.
http://www.wesleyjsmith.com.nyud.net:8090/blog/
Journal abstract of the original article for the techically inclined (same credit, Slashdot; you can download the article from this page, but I don't recommend it to people without a VERY solid biological background at the molecular and cell structure level and up -- there's lots of specialised neurocytology in there):
http://journalsonline.tandf.co.uk/(hibl2tibmt1yldqlfhsywa55)/app/home/contribution.asp?referrer=parent&backto=issue,8,9;journal,1,40;linkingpublicationresults,1:107693,1
I want to believe that this is possible. (I have a friend in similar straits as the woman in the study). I want to believe that this is true. But I recognize that one patient after one treatment is not proof of anything.
Finally, it is important for you all to recognize that this was not a miraculous recovery like Jesus's laying of hands on Lazarus produced. This woman has gotten a shred of motion and a thread of sensation back, which is a miracle, but it's still miles from recovery -- in functional terms, she's still paralysed.
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
Well, I'm sure even that little bit of improvement means a lot to her. Hope is what keeps us going. My father was a quadriplegic for the last 11 years of his life and I think he committed a form of passive suicide by stopping his drug regime that kept his kidneys going. I'd sure like to see some breakthroughs.
Christopher Reeves wanted embryonic stem cells used not adult.
Inject those in your brain, and everything you say comes out in rhyming verse.
My daughter has brain damage, and I keep on wondering if they'll find a way to reverse the damamge.
That said, my daughter has turned out remarkedly well, and if we could fix the damage I don't know if we would encourage it. She's only 9, and she is such a hard worker. She can do almost everything (except speak clearly) these days. Of course, everything is more difficult for her, and she still has lots of meltdowns.
Anyway, it's nice to see progress in these areas. It gives a lot of people hope!
It would be fine to see progress in these areas. This case doesn't appear to be such a thing.
It's a spinal cord injury, and spinal cord injuries and brain injuries have many similarities. You'll see lots of research that includes both areas.
Drs. Cox and Baumgartner in Houston have been doing a study on using children's own bone marrow in trauma cases. They're focusing on new damage and severely limited in funds. But, there is hope.
http://www.uthouston.edu/Media/newsreleases/nr2005/stemcell-child.html
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00254722?order=1
Every day, we learn more about the stimulation and recruiting of stem cells from the patient's own body and from donor cells, like cord blood.
Donations of cord blood, fat, peripheral blood, bone marrow are found much more easily and in larger numbers in practical terms, because there are more people than embryos that will ever be available for destruction, more babies being born than embryos in any lab or freezer, and because no one has to die for them.
Cord blood "unrestricted somatic stem cells" appear to me to be the most promising of all the stem cells.
Here's a fantastic review article
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1796850
The answers are obvious if you think about it -- even the "embryonic proponents" are trying to make *adult stem cells.*
None of the treatments involved in therapy - or likely to be in the future - are embryonic stem cells, because the cells we need only function in specific conditions and surroundings. The specific conditions and surroundings are only found in place, in the actual site of damage.
Embryonic stem cells function to make embryonic tissues and must develop into precursors and then specific tissues.
If you read the research articles, even those embryonic cells from the inner mass are not all universal cells. They have had some genes turned on and some genes turned off. The researchers select out the cells they desire by creating conditions that favor only those cells.
The trick in *both* embryonic and adult stem cell research is to find and support only the cells that are desired. And, again, the conditions that support the cells desired are only reliably found in the body, in site, and are best for non-embryonic stem cells and precursors.
On the other hand, "adult" or non-embryonic stem cells are found all over the body. Like the embryonic stem cells that come from the destruction of embryonic humans, there are many kinds. We are discovering which organs and tissues have their own stem cells in relatively large amounts, and which do not. Researchers have found precursors or other cells in bone marrow, fat, and cord cells and cord blood that can be induced to turn into the necessary cells, in numbers large enough for treatment.
That's great!!
Thank you for the ping ... encouraging. I note that you mentioned even embryonic stem cell researchers are seeking to generate adult stem cells. The vast majority of folks don't realize that.
I do wonder where the following idea came from:
Scientists Reverse Paralysis in Dogs
My Way News | Dec 3, 2004 | RICK CALLAHAN
Posted on 12/03/2004 7:07:48 PM EST by neverdem
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1293973/posts
A corollary to what you said: if it happened in California, it's more important than if the same thing happened anywhere else.
I would think the difference between NO motion or sensation and a "thread" or a "shred" is huge -- a lot bigger than some motion/sensation vs. more motion/sensation. When you've got some motion, you can build on it; when you've got nothing, you've got, well, nothing.
pa - ping!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.