Research shows setback for lab-made stem cells

jillio

jillio

New Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
60,232
Reaction score
19
New research suggests that laboratory-created stem cells might not be a solution to all the ethical problems created by stem cells from embryos, as many as hoped.

Yang Xu, professor of molecular biology, and colleagues at the University of California, San Diego, in a paper published Friday in the prestigious British journal Nature find that so-called induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) generate an immune response causing a mouse to reject them even when the iPSCs are made from the cells of that same mouse.

Research shows setback for lab-made stem cells - Health - Cloning and stem cells - msnbc.com

Back to square one. Looks like those that were so excited about using an individual's own stem cells have their hope dashed again.

Like I said before, there was a lot of misunderstanding regarding pluripotent stem cells. The rejection factor is not absent with pluripotent stem cells.
 
The completed sequencing of the human genome has given researchers new molecular pathways to explore. Maybe this will lead to the development of new drugs to alter basic molecular functions. Altering one pathway might cure several disease related to several molecular manifestations in that pathway. It sounds more promising than stem cells.
 
It's a setback, all right.

""Another approach has been suggested for creating stem cells that would not evoke an immune response. Scientists would take a patient's DNA, put it into an emptied shell of a human egg to create an embryo and then harvest stem cells from that embryo. This 'therapeutic cloning' would undoubtedly end up back in the thicket of the ethics debate."

That does not bode well for any success, since people would scream bloody murder at every step and slow down progress, if not halt it.
 
sallylou said:
The completed sequencing of the human genome has given researchers new molecular pathways to explore. Maybe this will lead to the development of new drugs to alter basic molecular functions. Altering one pathway might cure several disease related to several molecular manifestations in that pathway. It sounds more promising than stem cells.
Click to expand...

I agree. I have always thought that we would make more progress through the genome project than with stem cells.
 
Beowulf said:
It's a setback, all right.

""Another approach has been suggested for creating stem cells that would not evoke an immune response. Scientists would take a patient's DNA, put it into an emptied shell of a human egg to create an embryo and then harvest stem cells from that embryo. This 'therapeutic cloning' would undoubtedly end up back in the thicket of the ethics debate."

That does not bode well for any success, since people would scream bloody murder at every step and slow down progress, if not halt it.
Click to expand...

No doubt.:roll:
 
I think that scientists need to understand how the body works to discover treatments. More research on the immune system might allow scientists to fix the stem cell problem.
 
sallylou said:
I think that scientists need to understand how the body works to discover treatments. More research on the immune system might allow scientists to fix the stem cell problem.
Click to expand...

It might. But the fact is, the immune response is so individualized that nothing can be guaranteed. Especially when factoring in anti-rejection medications and individual response.
 
That may be true. Besides that, it's really complicated. So many immune system genes interacting with other genes.
 
sallylou said:
That may be true. Besides that, it's really complicated. So many immune system genes interacting with other genes.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Which is why I kept cautioning when the topic was hot around here that just because the PPSC came from the same individual it was being implanted it was no guarantee that rejection would not occur.
 
There's at least gene specifically related to susceptibility to organ transplant rejection. Imagine if they could crack that code.

Here's the search engine for the human genome:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/gquery

That should keep the science nerds busy a while.
 
Last edited:
Keep in mind that there's ALWAYS a tradeoff in everything, even how you eat and exercise, you eventually come up with diseases caused by your diet or exercise.

Example? If you eat a lot of fish (salmon, sardines, etc), you'll have lower risk of heart attacks as observed in studies BUT there's another thing that many don't mention - you also increase the risk of bleeding stroke.

Smoking - you'll be less likely to have Parkinson's or Alzhiemer's if you smoke but you're much more likely to have a heart attack or lung cancer.

So, we need to look at the whole picture. If smoking protects Parkinson's, why not start smoking? Well, here's the thing - you're much more likely to die of a heart attack caused by smoking than to die of Parkinson's if you never smoked.

So, even with cures, it can kill you in totally different ways. For example, aspirin can reduce heart attacks but it will increase the risk of bleeding.

I imagine that if everyone eats fatty fish, more people would die of strokes and you'd be bombed with suggestions to cut down on eating fish. That's exactly what's happening with studies.
 
when the topic was hot around here that just because the PPSC came from the same individual it was being implanted it was no guarantee that rejection would not occur.
Click to expand...
Not to mention, it's a big question if stem cells will even WORK.
 
I heard about from a researcher last year that had some success in growing hair cells in the cochlea but they ran into the problem of the body rejecting the new created hair cells as foreign. The scientists are not sure why that is. Back to the drawing board as I would say. The one limited sucess that I heard about stem cells is for autoimune conditions.
 
john57 said:
I heard about from a researcher last year that had some success in growing hair cells in the cochlea but they ran into the problem of the body rejecting the new created hair cells as foreign. The scientists are not sure why that is. Back to the drawing board as I would say. The one limited sucess that I heard about stem cells is for autoimune conditions.
Click to expand...

Yep. And even the autoimmune results are not longitudinal. We don't know if the effects are lasting.
 
john57 said:
I heard about from a researcher last year that had some success in growing hair cells in the cochlea but they ran into the problem of the body rejecting the new created hair cells as foreign. The scientists are not sure why that is. Back to the drawing board as I would say. The one limited sucess that I heard about stem cells is for autoimune conditions.
Click to expand...
Are you talking about in humans? Anyway, like you said, it's back to the drawing board.
 
In regards to the human genome project and "identifying genes related to thingy X" - one thing many people don't realize with genetics is that genes aren't a body's programming language, where you input DNA and out comes a person - there's all sorts of developmental and environmental factors that affect what comes out that, while the DNA is obviously important, still won't ever be a full cure.

I'm hoping someone gets nanotech functional within my lifetime. The increases from that are possible to be leaps even larger than the discovery of antibiotics and germ theory.
 
StSapphire said:
In regards to the human genome project and "identifying genes related to thingy X" - one thing many people don't realize with genetics is that genes aren't a body's programming language, where you input DNA and out comes a person - there's all sorts of developmental and environmental factors that affect what comes out that, while the DNA is obviously important, still won't ever be a full cure.

I'm hoping someone gets nanotech functional within my lifetime. The increases from that are possible to be leaps even larger than the discovery of antibiotics and germ theory.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. It is generations away, I believe.

We had a group not long ago that kept insisting deafness would be cured with stem cells in the next few years. And then, when I tried to explain to Kokonut that thanks to Obama, the research was opened back up he started in on the plueripotent cells. I tried to explain how adult stem cells work, but he kept insisting that this was the answer and no worries about rejection.
 
StSapphire said:
I'm hoping someone gets nanotech functional within my lifetime. The increases from that are possible to be leaps even larger than the discovery of antibiotics and germ theory.
Click to expand...
Yes, I heard that Nanotechnology could be another option or possibility.
 
Back
Top