Human ( embryonic stem) cells used to make paralysed rats walk (UC Irvine, Geron)

UK Independent ^ | July 3, 2003 | Charles Arthur

[FairOpinion]

Cells from human embryos could be used to help some people with spinal injuries to walk again, successful work involving rats has indicated.

Scientists from the University of California at Irvine college of medicine said that paralysed rats walked again after being injected with stem cells from "early-stage" human embryos. They hope that the breakthrough will prove to American policy makers that the use of human embryonic stem cells and therapeutic cloning - presently banned in the US - are justified.

The team, led by Hans Keirstead, took stem cells from early-stage human embryos, and altered them in the laboratory into oligodendrocytes. These are the primal cells that form myelin, the vital fatty sheath that surrounds nerve fibres. These cells were transplanted into paralysed rats with bruised spines. After nine weeks, the rats regained the ability to walk, New Scientist magazine reports today.

Analysis of the rats' spinal cords showed that the oligodendrocytes had wrapped themselves around neurons and formed new myelin sheaths. They also secreted growth substances that appeared to have stimulated the formation of new nerves.

Dr Keirstead said last week that he planned to use the same technique to treat human patients who had suffered recent spinal cord injuries and localised damage.

Treating people who have been paralysed for years or suffer from degenerative nerve diseases would be far more difficult. Stem cells can develop into every form of tissue in the body; early embryos consist of stem cells, which then specialise as the embryo matures. If removed from the embryo early enough, they retain that ability to metamorphose into any sort of tissue. That realisation opened up the possibility of many new treatments.

But in Britain and America, the use of stem cells is strictly regulated, and the European Union may ban any such experiments. In the US, federal money cannot be used for stem-cell research.

The latest work was funded by the US biotechnology company Geron, whose president, Thomas Okarma, said only embryonic stem cells could really succeed in new therapies. Embryonic cells could be mass-produced, unlike adult stem cells. Mr Okarma said that one cell bank derived from a single embryo could yield enough neurons to treat 10 million Parkinson's disease patients. He added that adult stem cells might not be as versatile as embryonic ones.

He said: "At this moment, there is very little hard evidence that a bone marrow stem cell can turn into anything but blood or that a skin stem cell can become anything but skin."

The method does not hold any immediate promise for accident victims such as the actor Christopher Reeve, who was paralysed from the neck down in a riding accident in May 1995. His spine was badly crushed by the bones of his neck, cutting many nerves to the rest of his body. In the rat research, the repaired nerves were only "bruised".

Mr Reeve has been among those lobbying to reverse the US government's opposition to stem-cell research. Dozens of scientists are working on spinal cord repair methodologies. But despite numerous successes in rats, hardly any have moved forward to human trials.

[FairOpinion]

Embyonic stem cells are providing a real breakthrough in medicine.

[Cicero]

This should please PETA. Killing babies to help rats.

[TheDon]

Franken Mouse! Unfortunate, and not required.

[FairOpinion]

Actually there are fertilized eggs created, but not all implanted when people try for babies using artificial insemination and there are always many left over. Rather than destroying them, they can use the for stem cell research.

[TommyDale]

I wonder if Larry Flynt is a candidate. He's as big a rat as they get.

[LadyDoc]

If human embryonic stem cells can make mice walk, then why can't we use mouse embryonic stem cells to make humans walk?

The ghastly thing about this type of experiment is that is shows that there is a lucrative underground in selling embryos for parts.

After all, mice get pregnant and have several litters a year, so it should be easy and cheap to get mice embryos.

[kuma]

If people want to cannabalize other human beings then let them go to Britian. Why do Americans who were in favor of the Ban have to share in their guilt?

[sarasmom]

Fair subject.
But the creation and disposition of those "extra" embryo's, is still hotly debated, legally and ethically.
I may be miss-informed, but I seem to recall that "stem cells" are abundant in routinely discarded and uncontroversial human umbilical cords.
Use that for research.
I "waste" an egg every month during menstruation.
Goodness knows how much sperm is "wasted" by any particular male.
On the surface, it seems logical to gather that waste and send it to various scientific labs for experiments.
It is not that simple.
It has been hard enough to get some humans to evolve to the point that the idea of respect for each individual human life is a rational, civilised concept.
There are still large pockets of the globe that are unable to entertain this concept at all.
But I am certain that the Indian "father" who buried his third daughter alive(she seems to have survived 16 hours underground) would agree with you that human embryo's, and even infants, are routinely expendable.
Science needs reigns.Just because something can be done, does not mean it should be done.

[kuma]

My eggs containing my DNA are my property. I think this is something that people fear when going to fertility doctors. "Leftovers" could be used without their knowledge.

[gcruse]

Was the Superman-eating-a-fetus episode on South Park a documentary ya think?

[RightWhale]

This is a bad idea, Doctor Frankenstein.

[FairOpinion]

But suppose someone would give their permission?

The point I was trying to make is that clearly embryonic stem cells could help many people with to-date incurable, sever diseases, and that we don't have to "kill babies" to obtain them, it's not a "choice" of "killing the babies or not", it's a choice of discarding fertilized eggs, which aren't babies because they never get implanted into a womb, or using them to benefit others.

Someone mentioned that umbilical chords contain a lot of stem cells, I don't know why those aren't being used, or whether there is a difference between those cells and the true embryonic stem cells.

[kuma]

I've heard it stated, by those who know the details more than I, that the fetal "embryonic" cell is the "Master Cell". This cell begins to divide all on it's own before it ever implants itself.

This means it is already forming the fetus all on it's own. Attempting to determine it's own existence and all it simply needs are more nutrients. It's not the uterus that builds the fetus, it does that job on it's own quite well. Therefore, it has it's own DNA, it's own will to exist otherwise it wouldn't seek out nutrients to continue living and multiplying.

Like I said before they can fly to countries that think they have some inalienable right to cannabalize and relieve the rest of us of the collective aiding and abetting in murdering someone (with their own DNA and will to survive) for their own benefit.

[kuma]

Sorry to post twice but the ones in the umbilical cords aren't widely pursued because it's less "convenient". They can only harvest so many in each cord.

[SwordofTruth]

If human embryonic stem cells can make mice walk, then why can't we use mouse embryonic stem cells to make humans walk?

You are a very wise woman. Too bad most won't listen to your excellent idea.

[sarasmom]

"But suppose someone would give their permission?"
Oh hey, if permission is all you need,thats OK! (sarcasm)

I got a spare ovary, and I really need the money, so they can just buy about what,7,000 eggs for,say, $1.50 each?
Everybody happy?

If you dont know whether or not umbilical cord stem cells can be used in research, why are you so willing to approve of embryo's as scientific fodder?If you do not know the facts,how do you justify your position?
Have you thought out the ramifications at all?
I am a great fan of scientific medical advances.
I can also personally testify that some advances carry great human risk.
I had the very best care that medicine could offer during my pregnancy.As I was high risk,and had a good HMO health insurance,I had 6 sonograms by an obstetrician who was the highest rated obstetrician in my area.
We almost parted ways when I refused an amneo test.(the test itself causes "spontaneous abortions" in 1 of 200 tests).
I was willing to risk delivering to term, a less than perfect example of a human infant.
All the wonderfull sonograms picked up numerous indicators of potential problems.
My child is normal, healthy, and very much beloved.
She would have been very much beloved if she was not born normal and healthy.
She was born, and is alive,despite the best available medical advice.
You might say I got lucky.Having walked that mile, I am not willing to tell someone else what they should do, and what choices they should make.
But I am very much opposed to letting scientists and medical experimentation override personal human choice.
An egg and a sperm, separated, are a human waste products.
Combined,they become something else.
I am old and wise enough to shamelessly admit that I do not have the answer to the question, of how much we should, as humanity, allow science to experiment with potential human life, for any reason.
I ask you to explain why you are so certain that experimentation on human embryonic life should be acceptable.

[Zevonismymuse]

I support a charity which is funding similar experiments, only with stem cells taken from the adult mouse. I went to a video presentation in which the scientist addressed the adult stem cells VS embryonic stem cells. The scientist said that she had no problem with using embryoic if they worked the best. Her experiments demonstrated that the adult cells worked better.

The scientist made a point of warning us how people on both sides were trying to make this an abortion rights argument. She said that the embryonic cells were far too unpredictible to be used and had a tendency to grow out of control.

Her lab had the same success described with the mice. After having their spines severed, most of the mice were able to regain some use of their lower extremities and bare some weight after being treated with adult stem cells from the atient mouse. The treatment was not administered until some time after the injury because the test was attempting to determine if people who had been injured years before could benefit from stem this proceedure.

It is all very exciting. Just a heads up about some of the political posturing going on.

[Dimensio]

The point I was trying to make is that clearly embryonic stem cells could help many people with to-date incurable, sever diseases, and that we don't have to "kill babies" to obtain them, it's not a "choice" of "killing the babies or not", it's a choice of discarding fertilized eggs, which aren't babies because they never get implanted into a womb, or using them to benefit others.

You may not believe that it's a baby, but there are those who believe that it is an individual precious human life that is created the instant the sperm cell merges with the egg cell. That's the fundamental nature of the debate. As such, they would much rather that these excess human lives be left to rot than be used to help others.

[sarasmom]

"You may not believe that it's a baby, but there are those who believe that it is an individual precious human life that is created the instant the sperm cell merges with the egg cell. That's the fundamental nature of the debate. As such, they would much rather that these excess human lives be left to rot than be used to help others."

Oh please!
Based solely on this quote, one could assume that you think that your extra kidney( you can live on one) is a marketable commodity, and that you are a selfish person if you do nor offer up an extra kidney for the good of humanity.
BTW, you selfish SOB,why are you keeping both eyes when you could donate a cornea for the good of another human life?
And do let us check your blood type.It may be so valuable that, for the greater good of humanity, we need to curtail your freedom, and hook you up to a continuous donation line.
What? You protest that your life has more value?
Let us put it to a popular vote, among those most likely to benefit from your "donations",freely given or forced,whatever works best.

[FairOpinion]

The point is that currently thousands of embryos are created for IVF. Couples want one or two children, not hundreds. So there are always left over embryos, which are being destroyed. Suppose a couple give permission to use them for research instead of destroying them, since they could hold significant benefits for others.

You want to argue whether or not it's even moral to have IVF, and artificially create embryos, that's another debate.

But the fact is that IVF IS being done, thousands of embryos are being created, not used, then destroyed. This is a fact. Why is it wrong to use them to help others?