Go back and do it again until it starts requiring infanticide, or it will never get Federal funding or media attention.
Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.
Posted on 11/27/2010 2:02:25 PM PST by wagglebee
BERLIN, November 26, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Doctors associated with the German umbilical cord blood bank Vita 34 say that they have cured a child’s leukemia completely using an infusion of stem cells from umbilical cord blood.
The procedure was reportedly performed in 2005 on a four-year-old girl whose chemotherapy treatment had failed and who had a prognosis of only three months to live. The procedure was possible because the parents had decided to preserve their child’s umbilical cord blood at the time of birth.
After continuous monitoring of the child for five years now, with no sign of leukemia cells in her blood, doctors say that they have confirmed that the treatment worked.
“Seventy-five months have passed and we can speak of a cure with certainty,” said Eberhard Lampeter of Vita 34.
According to the Chilean newspaper La Tercera, this is the first case in the world of a child cured of leukemia by her own stem cells. In most cases the child’s umbilical cord blood is not available, and the stem cells of close family members must be used.
The new treatment is the latest in a long string of hundreds of successes in the science of stem cell treatments that use mature cells rather than embryonic stem cells. Embryonic stem cell treatments, which destroy a human life, have never been proven effective in any medical treatment to date. Treatments with mature stem cells do not cause harm to the donor of the cells.
Stem cell pioneer Dr. Colin McGuckin recently told LifeSiteNews that, despite amazing success with umbilical cord blood treatments, it remains difficult to obtain funding for research because of the “cult of celebrity” in science, which rewards controversial research over research that is truly effective in saving lives.
“People aren’t talking about cord blood because it’s not controversial,” McGuckin told LSN. “Consequently, it does not make headlines and therefore researchers who want to use the cells from cord blood do not receive funding.”
I recall $3K upfront - and it’s no more than $100 a year to maintain. We stored our first of two child’s CB. We figured if the second child, or even a parent needed it, there it is.
I expected we’d hear more of this kind of success by now. But any success is good progress. I hope this type of research continues and more people store CB. It’s really easy.
the girl was 4 at the time of treatment. How could they preserve the cord cells for 4 years? The fact that nothing is said about it makes me suspicious of this article.
Sorry, I hadn’t read the preceding posts, which answered my question
iirc, the cells are frozen or suspended in a special solution indefinitely.
red blood cells can be stored for many years, at least 10
It is stored in liquid nitrogen.
Same way they store semen for artificial insemination which they have been doing with cows for many years.
BTW I have 3 G kids who have theirs stored. (Just in case since their other grandfather died of leukemia)
WebMD has some straight talk on saving cord blood
http://www.webmd.com/baby/should-i-bank-my-babys-umbilical-cord-blood#tn10338
They say that cord blood banks oversell their services, that cord blood is useful in only a tiny number of cases.
They say that a child with leukemia shouldn’t use her own cord blood cells because they may have the same genetic defect that caused leukemia in the first place.
Go back and do it again until it starts requiring infanticide, or it will never get Federal funding or media attention.
Thank you, God, for this provision!! Wow, I can’t wait to see what the future holds for these cells.
Thanks waggs!
“Go back and do it again until it starts requiring infanticide, or it will never get Federal funding or media attention”
Until a rival nation starts doing it and all their scientists start getting Nobel Prizes.
I EXPECT Conservative people to do what Bush did. Who on the right is denying him credit?
Cord blood has the advantage that it is less likely to give rise to "graft-vs.-host disease" where the donated blood products / marrow / stem cells try to mount an immune response against the patient receiving the donation.
Disadvantage is you almost always have to freeze and store, in hopes a match will work; and the smaller volume.
("In Soviet Russia, organ rejects YOU!")...
Cheers!
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.