The truth about embryonic stem cell (ESC) therapies

CERC ^ | 10.17.06

[Lexinom]

“When you put them [ESC] in an environment where they can grow and develop, they make lots of different kind of tissues. This tumour formation property is an inherent feature of the cells.

One of the ways malignant tumors are delinateated is by their differentiation. This refers to how well the cells are differentiated from their parent phenotype, with well-differentiated carcinoma looking a lot like the original parent cell from which the tumor originated (better prognosis), and poorly- or undifferentiated tumors looking nothing at all like normal tissue (agressive, grim prognosis).

To use lung cancer as an example, carcinoids are well-differeniated and have an excellent cure rate (>90%), poorly-differentiated squamous-cell lung CA carries an intermediate prognosis (<%30), and small-cell lung cancer is an undifferentiated, poorly defined, very aggressive malignancy with an overall 5-year survival of about 6%.

What Dr. Sherley has described is a quasi-differentiated tumor arising from embryonic stem cells. How would this be treated I wonder? How aggressive are these apparently malignant tumors?

And how many years and dollars will be wasted, with patients like Michael J. Fox wasting away, pushing for untenable ESC research that could have been invested in further nurturing and improving ASC and ANT-OAR?

[Coleus]

Thanks.