Info on STEM CELLS from scientific source

kokonut said:
Jules Verne:
...

Twenty Thousand Leagues under the Sea? A league is 3 nautical miles or 3.45 miles where 20,000 leagues = 5797 miles. Surface of Earth to core is 3975 miles). Impossible. You'd shoot out into orbit on the other side of the globe.

...
Click to expand...

While off topic and somewhat irrelevant, I would like to point out that 20,000 leagues in the story meant a trip going that distance underwater from point A to point B. Not depthwise. Furthermore, the math is off...lets see if a league is ~ 3.45 miles then 20,000 leagues is 20,000 * 3.45 is almost 70,000 miles. The circumference of the earth is ~ 25,000 miles. So, this trip went almost three times around the earth.

Gotta be careful of all the facts when marshalling one's arguments...:D
 
Although we finally found out that talking about stem cells is OT in this section of the forum, if I understood correctly we are allowed to carry on the discussion here...

What nobody commented (ad I am pretty surprised) is the fact that among all the posts dealing with stem cells (and I red them all), here for the first time some risk associated to the treatments came out. And they are not minor risks! Experts talk about the possibility to develop tumors if they won't find the right way to instruct the stem cells to stop their grow once the tissue has been repaired.

In the most of the discussions about stem cells you can find in this forum, the comparison with CI emerges and one of the biggest argument agains CI is obviously the risks associated with the surgery. We should tune the balance, this way we are going to compare facial paralysis to tumor generation...

My intention is not to convince anybody, nor to destroy hopes or expectations, but to try to give a picture as comprehensive as possible about the field. It is very very important not to be taken by the hype and by the wonderful promises this technology is taking. It will be certainly a great thing and some breakthrough may happen for sure. But we are still talking about the future.
 
sr171soars said:
While off topic and somewhat irrelevant, I would like to point out that 20,000 leagues in the story meant a trip going that distance underwater from point A to point B. Not depthwise. Furthermore, the math is off...lets see if a league is ~ 3.45 miles then 20,000 leagues is 20,000 * 3.45 is almost 70,000 miles. The circumference of the earth is ~ 25,000 miles. So, this trip went almost three times around the earth.

Gotta be careful of all the facts when marshalling one's arguments...:D
Click to expand...

It says "20,000 Leagues *UNDER* the Sea." Not "20,000 Leagues Across the Sea."

Again, it sounds exciting when one says "20,000 leagues" versus 2 leagues under the sea (7.9 miles) for a book title when the deepest ocean is 6 3/4 miles deep.
 
kokonut said:
It says "20,000 Leagues *UNDER* the Sea." Not "20,000 Leagues Across the Sea."

Again, it sounds exciting when one says "20,000 leagues" versus 2 leagues under the sea (7.9 miles) for a book title when the deepest ocean is 6 3/4 miles deep.
Click to expand...

Um... have you even read the book? It's re-accounting Captian Nemo's adventure in his submarine...

It means he TRAVELLED 20,000 leagues under the sea, not that he dove 20,000 leagues. The Nautilus has travelled around the Earth fifteen times. You have to remember the circumstance of the Earth was well-known since philosophical Greece through mathematics based on the angles of shadows. If you actually have read the book, the deepest depth mentioned was 4 lieue which would be around 16 kilometres (or 10 miles) in the French lieue metric. They didn't know how deep the ocean was back in 1870 when the book was published. So the fact that he was only 3 miles off of his estimate isn't bad. Also in it, he had an idea that resemble nuclear submarines today. Unfortunately, he had the notion of men and submarines being able to freely submerge at any depth without suffering from severe compression. But nonetheless, he had many ideas that are similar if not good counterparts to our idea of deep-sea exploration.

Also, the literal translation of the novel from French to English should had ended in "seas," not "sea," which would had been better since it would be playing on "the seven seas" and would give concept of distance travelled versus depth. Anyway, we are getting off-topic.

All I am saying...

All this talk of stem-cells being the cure is only currently science-fiction idea that only exists in the world of authors' ideas-- which a few have predicted well ahead of their times, in which of them are technology we use today.
 
souggy said:
Where did it say it's not okay as a treatment for deafness? The problem is that this is not specific to deafness, but rather a broad overview for every medical purposes out there.

For future reference, use "treatment," not "cure." That way you won't fall flat on your face if it doesn't pan out to be complete restoration.
Click to expand...

I don't expect stem cells to cure my hearing loss anytime soon. I just expect at least 20db improvement. That guy who got stem cells in Costa Rica got a 25db improvement. Even my audiologist doesn't believe stem cells can cure deafness.(well it can eventually but not right now) So yea, id call it a treatment that can make you less deaf and be able to achieve more benefits from HAs.
 
ref74 said:
What nobody commented (ad I am pretty surprised) is the fact that among all the posts dealing with stem cells (and I red them all), here for the first time some risk associated to the treatments came out. And they are not minor risks! Experts talk about the possibility to develop tumors if they won't find the right way to instruct the stem cells to stop their grow once the tissue has been repaired.
Click to expand...

From what ive read, they only inject/insert a small amount of stem cells and once all those stem cells turn into hair cells or whatever other cells, there's no more stem cells left in your body as they have all been used up. I also read that using your own adult stem cells is generally safe unless they inject/insert way too many cells. In China, treatments consists of several rounds, each time they inject a small amount and observe the results. For hearing loss, a stem cell lab in China used 6 rounds of treatment and stopped after enough hearing was restored. They didn't want to risk overcorrecting because youd have too many hair cells and youd end up hearing worse and also risk tumors from too many cells. When I get treated for hearing loss a few years from now, it will be known exactly how much improvement is possible and when to stop as no further improvement is possible without risking too many hair cells.

In the most of the discussions about stem cells you can find in this forum, the comparison with CI emerges and one of the biggest argument agains CI is obviously the risks associated with the surgery. We should tune the balance, this way we are going to compare facial paralysis to tumor generation...
Click to expand...

Im giving stem cells a few years to work out the risks and to quickly advance. I can wait a few years before getting stem cells.
 
Interesting...finally something about risks after all the gung-ho touting that stem cells will cure everything!

Still for all that, I'm not convinced that it will happen anytime soon at least here in the US. The FDA moves glacially for good reason.

Off topic to address some prior comments about Jules Verne and 20,000 leagues under the sea.

Kokonut - The story is about an epic journey under the sea travelling all over the world to see and experience amazing things. The journey very closely resembles what nuclear subs do today. Most people would have understood the journey wasn't so much about going down to the bottom "per se" as much as travelling the seas but underwater. There was a TV series called the "Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea" which was similar to the book.

Souggy - I'm surprised at you. At least you understood the story but still get your facts mixed up about circumference. 20,000 leagues is about 60,000 miles if a league is ~3 miles (apparently there are different definitions what this is). There is no way the Nautlus could have traveled 15 times around the world. It is more like almost three times. See the link below to note that the world is about 25,000 miles in circumference.

What is the circumference of the earth?
 
Yes Botts you are correct, but when you post about stem cells to cure deafness I think it can fall into any of those places, all I do know is it doesnt fall in this category lol
 
candybrowneyes said:
Yes Botts you are correct, but when you post about stem cells to cure deafness I think it can fall into any of those places, all I do know is it doesnt fall in this category lol
Click to expand...


Hi, can you create a new category(for example):

AllDeaf.com > Deaf Interests > Stem Cells and Hearing Loss Regeneration >

Then we can all post whatever we want about stem cells in that category. All stem cell posts elsewhere will be moved there or just locked.
 
souggy said:
Um... have you even read the book? It's re-accounting Captian Nemo's adventure in his submarine...

It means he TRAVELLED 20,000 leagues under the sea, not that he dove 20,000 leagues. The Nautilus has travelled around the Earth fifteen times. You have to remember the circumstance of the Earth was well-known since philosophical Greece through mathematics based on the angles of shadows. If you actually have read the book, the deepest depth mentioned was 4 lieue which would be around 16 kilometres (or 10 miles) in the French lieue metric. They didn't know how deep the ocean was back in 1870 when the book was published. So the fact that he was only 3 miles off of his estimate isn't bad. Also in it, he had an idea that resemble nuclear submarines today. Unfortunately, he had the notion of men and submarines being able to freely submerge at any depth without suffering from severe compression. But nonetheless, he had many ideas that are similar if not good counterparts to our idea of deep-sea exploration.

Also, the literal translation of the novel from French to English should had ended in "seas," not "sea," which would had been better since it would be playing on "the seven seas" and would give concept of distance travelled versus depth. Anyway, we are getting off-topic.

All I am saying...

All this talk of stem-cells being the cure is only currently science-fiction idea that only exists in the world of authors' ideas-- which a few have predicted well ahead of their times, in which of them are technology we use today.
Click to expand...

I stand corrected....the 20,000 leagues.
 
Infant born blind, depending on the kind, could in fact benefit from stem cells, gene therapy or other kind of biomedicine someday that would restore an infant vision is not out of the realm of impossibility
Click to expand...
Yes, but the current blindness treatment is for AQUIRRED blindness........I'm not sayign that it's not possible for little kids who are blind to someday benifit from stem cells or gene therapy...Just saying as of NOW, the only treatment is for ADULT aquirred blindness.
 
.In many tissues each new cell has the potential either to remain a stem cell or become another type of cell with a more specialized function, the process to become specialized is not fully understood, thus the need for further research.
 
ref74 said:
Although we finally found out that talking about stem cells is OT in this section of the forum, if I understood correctly we are allowed to carry on the discussion here...

What nobody commented (ad I am pretty surprised) is the fact that among all the posts dealing with stem cells (and I red them all), here for the first time some risk associated to the treatments came out. And they are not minor risks! Experts talk about the possibility to develop tumors if they won't find the right way to instruct the stem cells to stop their grow once the tissue has been repaired.

In the most of the discussions about stem cells you can find in this forum, the comparison with CI emerges and one of the biggest argument agains CI is obviously the risks associated with the surgery. We should tune the balance, this way we are going to compare facial paralysis to tumor generation...

My intention is not to convince anybody, nor to destroy hopes or expectations, but to try to give a picture as comprehensive as possible about the field. It is very very important not to be taken by the hype and by the wonderful promises this technology is taking. It will be certainly a great thing and some breakthrough may happen for sure. But we are still talking about the future.
Click to expand...

Well said. Of course there are risks. Many of those risks are just beginning to come to the forefront, and there are many more that will not be evident until longitudinal studies are available. That is exactly why I have recommended that people actually take the time to investigate the scientific fact rather than relying on overly optimisitic and selective press releases.
 
jillio said:
Well said. Of course there are risks. Many of those risks are just beginning to come to the forefront, and there are many more that will not be evident until longitudinal studies are available. That is exactly why I have recommended that people actually take the time to investigate the scientific fact rather than relying on overly optimisitic and selective press releases.
Click to expand...

then you you think a reputable company that will be applied or is applying stem cells in children younger than 18 months may be at risk?
I think that being a very serious company knows that the cure is possible, a cure for hearing loss. Otherwise would not recruit children under 18 months.
see: Cord Blood Stem Cell Banking - FAQs About Cord Blood, Stem Cells, and Cord Blood Banking

and CBR Center for Regenerative Medicine - Hearing Loss - Cord Blood Stem Cells from Cord Blood Registry
 
neuro said:
then you you think a reputable company that will be applied or is applying stem cells in children younger than 18 months may be at risk?
I think that being a very serious company knows that the cure is possible, a cure for hearing loss. Otherwise would not recruit children under 18 months.
see: Cord Blood Stem Cell Banking - FAQs About Cord Blood, Stem Cells, and Cord Blood Banking

and CBR Center for Regenerative Medicine - Hearing Loss - Cord Blood Stem Cells from Cord Blood Registry
Click to expand...

No, I don't think there will be risks, I know for a fact that there are already known risks that have been determined scientifically and medically, and additional probable risks that cannot be determinined without logitudinal studies.

They are recruiting children for experimental purposes. You ever seen the paperwork that parents have to sign to get their kid into a clinical trial like this? The researchers are aware that there are risks both known and unknown, and therefore, parents must sign a legal document stating that they will not hold the researchers responsible for any negative consequences that may occur during the experimental procedure.
 
jillio said:
No, I don't think there will be risks, I know for a fact that there are already known risks that have been determined scientifically and medically, and additional probable risks that cannot be determinined without logitudinal studies.

They are recruiting children for experimental purposes. You ever seen the paperwork that parents have to sign to get their kid into a clinical trial like this? The researchers are aware that there are risks both known and unknown, and therefore, parents must sign a legal document stating that they will not hold the researchers responsible for any negative consequences that may occur during the experimental procedure.
Click to expand...

took risks as the cochlear implant at the time, and there are likely consequences, risks, etc.., we all know about cochlear implants.
But do not lose heart in trials with cochlear implants, why now discourage stem cells. That certainly would have to distinguish what types of stem cells. It is the same as embryonic stem cells, adult stem cells or umbilical cord. In eLAC Site cordbloodregistry clear about the risks with stem cells, no?
 
"Are cord blood stem cells different than other stem cells?

Yes. When compared to adult stem cells, cord blood stem cells are biologically unique and are advantageous due to their higher rates of proliferation, immunological immaturity, and reduced exposure to viruses and aging. In comparison to embryonic stem cells, cord blood cells are proven safe in the human body and have been used effectively for decades in medical treatment".

source: Cord Blood Stem Cell Banking - FAQs About Cord Blood, Stem Cells, and Cord Blood Banking
 
neuro said:
took risks as the cochlear implant at the time, and there are likely consequences, risks, etc.., we all know about cochlear implants.
But do not lose heart in trials with cochlear implants, why now discourage stem cells. That certainly would have to distinguish what types of stem cells. It is the same as embryonic stem cells, adult stem cells or umbilical cord. In eLAC Site cordbloodregistry clear about the risks with stem cells, no?
Click to expand...

Who is discouraging? I think the research into stem cell use should continue, particularly where it can provide a possiblity of cure for life threatening and debillitating disease. I am simply saying "Be realisitic, and check the scientific information before going off on an overly optimisitic tangent about deafness being cured in the next 5 years with no risk." The fact is, there is still tremendous risk, both known and unknown. The link you provided above is, once again, a press release full of "maybes" and "might bes". There are no definitive answers yet. And of course the cord blood registry is interested in getting people to store their newborn's cord blood there. That is how the company makes its money.
 
One factor keep getting missed

One factor keeps getting missed. What caused the hearing loss in the first place. Certain forms of SNHL like autoimmune & genetic may be a bit of a problem. Also most of us adults do not have cord blood stored anywhere.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top