Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

MIT Prof: Embryonic Stem Cell Research Nowhere Close to Helping Patients
Life News ^ | 10/10/06 | Steven Ertelt

Posted on 10/10/2006 4:17:41 PM PDT by wagglebee

Canberra, Australia (LifeNews.com) -- An MIT professor says that embryonic stem cell research is nowhere close to helping patients. He said that's because scientists haven't yet figured out how to stop embryonic stem cells from causing tumors when injected into patients.

Professor James Sherley, a stem cell researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was in Australia to talk with lawmakers about why they should resist backing legislation promoting human cloning.

Sherley said that embryonic stem cells cause tumors and cancers when injected into human tissue and, as a result, they can't be used to treat patients with various diseases. He said the tumors form because embryonic stem cells have the potential to turn into various other kinds of tissues -- including the wrong ones.

“When you put them in an environment where they can grow and develop, they make lots of different kind of tissues,” Sherley said, according to a Courier Mail newspaper report.

Sherley said that the "tumor formation property is an inherent feature of the cells" and warned that the possibility of overcoming it is likely very far into the future.

"And although some might say we can solve the tumor problem down the road, that's equivalent to saying we can solve the cancer problem and we may, but that's a long time coming," he explained.

According to the Courier Mail, the MIT professor said that the tumors embryonic stem cells cause are mostly benign but they could metastasize or produce chemicals that can adversely affect parts of the body.

Sherley also said that numerous American scientists agree with his view that embryonic stem cells cause problems and are a very long way off from helping patients but that they have been reluctant to speak out due to the highly political nature of the debate and worries over losing funding for their research.

He said adult stem cells have been successful in treating patients because they don't cause tumors when injected.

University of Melbourne Emeritus Professor of Medicine Thomas Martin agreed with Sherley's concerns and told lawmakers that a previous review of the science undertaken by the Lockhart panel failed to consider the tumors issue when issuing its report.

Martin said he did not think that embryonic stem cell research would even lead to cures for major diseases such as diabetes or Parkinson's.

Martin, an internationally recognized Fellow of the Royal Society, said the embryonic stem cells produced from human cloning would have the same problems.


TOPICS: Australia/New Zealand; Business/Economy; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: crevolist; embryonicstemcells; escr; mit; prolife; stemcellresearch; stemcells; teratomas; tumors
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last
To: speekinout
When so much public money is going to ESC research, private orgs don't need to spend their own money for it.

I'm anti-ESC, but I have to point out that your statement is factually incorrect. The amount of public money going into ESC is tiny because the Federal Government, under the president's executive order, will not fund it.

There is some state money going in, and some foriegn governments are funding it, but none of these other public sources have the kind of resources of our Federal Government.

21 posted on 10/10/2006 6:19:25 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GSlob
I oppose ESC research, but primarily on ethical grounds. I agree with you that the other arguments against it are not very strong.

I would like to see my side stick to the ethical case. Speculating about whether or not it could provide cures is really beside the point, IMHO.

22 posted on 10/10/2006 6:22:40 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Fascinating. I'd heard about the failures but I hadn't heard about the tumors. I'm very limited in biological science study, but I'm pretty logical. Could it be that the embryonic cells are faster replicating and out of synch with the more mature host?


23 posted on 10/10/2006 6:26:15 PM PDT by jimfree (Freep and ye shall find.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Embryonic stem cell "research" in the European Union has less than 1 millions euros allocated annually for it. Even they know it's a blind alley.


24 posted on 10/10/2006 6:30:06 PM PDT by Norman Bates
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

It's true that the Fed'l gov't has more resources than the states do. But not a lot of that money goes to any specific research project. What the states give is more than many projects could expect from the Feds.

It's not totally correct that no Fed'l money goes to ESC research. Bush did allow money for research on existing embryonic stem cell lines.


25 posted on 10/10/2006 6:36:42 PM PDT by speekinout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: speekinout
It's true that the Fed'l gov't has more resources than the states do. But not a lot of that money goes to any specific research project. What the states give is more than many projects could expect from the Feds.

That's just not true. It's only a couple states doing it, and the amounts they are actually giving dwarf the amount comparable projects get from the NIH and other Fed institutions that fund scientific research.

It's not totally correct that no Fed'l money goes to ESC research. Bush did allow money for research on existing embryonic stem cell lines.

Correct, but only a small number of those lines are actually usable, and the amount that has been spent thus far is very small.

Which is a good thing, I might add. I think ESC research is unethical.

26 posted on 10/10/2006 6:46:05 PM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: GSlob
As long as there are smart people working on them, the things which are "likely very far into the future" become closer every day, like it was [and still is, 50 years later] with, for example, fusion reactors. Where would that field be if the work in it stopped after the first small tokamak?

About the same place it is today --- just around the corner after we get our next grant. Literally, 30 years ago I talked to one of the Princeton Tokamak guys who flat out guaranteed that we would have fusion in just 10 more years --- as long as congress kept funding the program. Congress did.

One thousand miles journey starts with the first step and continues with the next ones, but he who stops walking will never reach the goal.

There is nothing stopping people from doing embryonic stem cell research now. Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and George Sourus can dump their entire fortunes into financing it if they choose. I appreciate the fact that under Bush, the US Government has said it will not finance a practice that many taxpayers, myself included, see as inhumane, and the serious scientific data, including from this MIT guy, say that adult stem cells hold all of the promise and none of the malignant, either moral or biological, downsides of embryonic cells.

The embryonic stem cell debate is pure political football relying on the scientific and moral illiteracy of a large portion of the voting population. If it weren't for the politics involved and based strictly on the data, no one would even consider embryonic research.

27 posted on 10/10/2006 6:46:42 PM PDT by Ditto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

But it's a position supported by the Pro-Life camp. Therefore it has to be fought against by the Pro-Death camp. Logic and evidence be damned.


28 posted on 10/10/2006 6:59:35 PM PDT by tang-soo (Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks - Read Daniel Chapter 9)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

To all pro-lifers - not specifically wagglebee - please be cautious about LifeNews. Often Ertelt doesn't get the story right and mixes up stem cell methods.

BTW, left as as MIT is, Professor Sherley is no lefty ;-)


29 posted on 10/10/2006 7:42:04 PM PDT by Quiet Man Jr.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jimfree
Fascinating. I'd heard about the failures but I hadn't heard about the tumors.

This has been know for some time among researchers. But the press seldom mentions it. In my opinion, the bias of the press prevents them from reporting this.

Could it be that the embryonic cells are faster replicating and out of synch with the more mature host?

The article notes part of the problem:

He said the tumors form because embryonic stem cells have the potential to turn into various other kinds of tissues -- including the wrong ones. “When you put them in an environment where they can grow and develop, they make lots of different kind of tissues,” Sherley said.

Stem cells have the potential to become any type of cell in the body. Researches simply don't understand all of the mechanism involved to direct a stem cell to become only one type of cell and remain that type of cell.

There is another problem that the article does not mention. There is some evidence to suggest that stem cells, once they develop into a mature cell, could spontaneously revert back to a stem cell.

Here are a couple of articles from last year that you might want to read:
"Medical value of Stem Cells 'Over-Hyped' "
"Stem Cell Hopes Distortred by 'Arrogance and Spin' "

30 posted on 10/10/2006 7:49:16 PM PDT by stripes1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
An MIT professor says that embryonic stem cell research is nowhere close to helping patients.

That's because the US hasn't put 10% of its GNP into embryonic stem cell research, you heartless creep. /HEAVY sarcasm

For the Left, the more money one confiscates from others, the more compassionate one is. Concern over results is selfish.

31 posted on 10/10/2006 7:58:38 PM PDT by denydenydeny ("We have always been, we are, and I hope that we always shall be detested in France"--Wellington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: curiosity
There is some state money going in

$3 billion from California taxpayers via Prop 71. That's pretty good for "some money."

32 posted on 10/10/2006 8:18:04 PM PDT by denydenydeny ("We have always been, we are, and I hope that we always shall be detested in France"--Wellington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; GSlob
1. Adult (including umbilical cord) stem cell research has resulted in over SIX DOZEN breakthroughs and cures.

False comparison

The technology to harvest adult stem cells has been around since the 1960's while the ability to harvest embryonic stem cells has been around only since 1998. So you are comparing 40 year old technology to technology less than a decade old.

An analogy to your argument would be in 1936 saying we shouldn't research jet engines because we have dozens of examples of working propeller driven airplanes

2. Human life is destroyed to create embryonic stem cells.

And if they are not used for research they are thrown in the garbage as medical waste, so we might as well get some use out of them

33 posted on 10/10/2006 10:04:25 PM PDT by qam1 (There's been a huge party. All plates and the bottles are empty, all that's left is the bill to pay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: curiosity
Curiosity, you are wrong. There is LOTS of federal money going into ESCR. Many researchers who want to work with adult cells are complaining about the PRIORITY given to ESCR at NIH. The President only forbade the use of federal dollars-including MY money, thank you-for killing MORE embryos than have already been killed. His judgment was validated by the worldwide research community, which has nearly universally adopted the standard he set of using only those cell lines. Under those rules, there are 72 embryonic stem cell lines to choose from, and that is many more than are needed. Fifty of those lines haven't even come out of the freezer since they were stored there 5 years ago. In comparison, cancer-related cell culture research went decades with only ONE cell line available.

Embryonic stem cell lines are living remnants of human beings who were KILLED for their cells. What would be the reaction if these cell lines came from prisoners killed for research?

When President Bush ALLOWED federal funding of ESCR, which was prohibited under Clinton,
there was a virtual explosion of ESCR. That research has validated earlier conclusions that ESC's are inherently unstable and unlikely to be safe for therapies. However, there continue to be many studies of their properties, and the U.S. continues to lead the world on both ESCR and ASCR.
34 posted on 10/24/2006 11:30:47 AM PDT by Missouri gal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: qam1
1. "False comparison"
The first adult stem therapy was the first bone marrow transplant in 1968. I'm not sure they knew anything about adult stem cells. They just knew that the bone marrow was the source of new blood cells. They tried it, and it worked. It worked because adult stem cells are stable and function normally in their typical environment. Embryonic stem cells are placed into an environment very different than that of an embryo. They are inherently unstable there, and no amount of tryin' gonna change that. A human being is not a machine!
2. If they are not used for research, they are thrown in the garbage.
False. Embryos do not get thrown in the garbage. Only a small percentage of IVF embryos are available for research, which is why researchers keep trying new ploys to get women to donate eggs for research. Also, begs the question of the morality of creating human beings and freezing them in the first place. I suspect the doctors who do IVF have a special place in hell. A cold one.

3. Speaking of that cold place, why would you want to do something the hard, immoral way instead of the easy and ethical way in the first place?
35 posted on 10/24/2006 11:55:26 AM PDT by Missouri gal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; afraidfortherepublic; Alas; al_c; american colleen; annalex; ...
Embryonic Stem Cell Research on Animals Has FAILED to Produce Any Cures or Treatments in 25 Years

36 posted on 12/03/2006 9:24:22 PM PST by Coleus (Roe v. Wade and Endangered Species Act both passed in 1973, Murder Babies/save trees, geese, algae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus; nickcarraway; narses; Mr. Silverback; Canticle_of_Deborah; TenthAmendmentChampion; ...
Pro-Life PING

Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.

37 posted on 12/04/2006 11:09:34 AM PST by cpforlife.org (A Catholic Respect Life Curriculum is available at KnightsForLife.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: qam1
And if they are not used for research they are thrown in the garbage as medical waste, so we might as well get some use out of them

And that is why the Germans used the hair of slaughtered Jews to line boots and jackets and occasionally made soap and lampshades out of them. Might as well get some good use out of them Joooz.

38 posted on 12/04/2006 3:02:50 PM PST by DallasMike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Embryonic stem cells would be tissue transplantation from another person. Adult stem cells use the patient's own DNA. Embryonic stem cells would have much greater regulation cost and litigation risk.


39 posted on 12/04/2006 3:06:40 PM PST by Plutarch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GSlob
Another non-sequitur. Research is not, and should not be, confined to any one direction.

That's the spirit. Kill a baby for Rush!

40 posted on 12/06/2006 1:20:59 AM PST by TigersEye (Ego chatters on endlessly. Mind speaks in great silence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson