Home (Post) Mobile Authors Say Anything Register Login

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Embryonic Stem Cells?  Never Mind!  Bush was Right

With a pronounced lack of enthusiasm normally reserved for inconvenient truths which belie the liberal litany, the New York Times reports that two separate teams of scientists, one in Wisconsin and the other in Japan, appear to have successfully transformed normal human skin cells into the equivalent of embryonic stem cells.

Two teams of scientists are reporting today that they turned human skin cells into what appear to be embryonic stem cells without having to make or destroy an embryo — a feat that could quell the ethical debate troubling the field.

All they had to do, the scientists said, was add four genes. The genes reprogrammed the chromosomes of the skin cells, making the cells into blank slates that should be able to turn into any of the 220 cell types of the human body, be it heart, brain, blood or bone. Until now, the only way to get such human universal cells was to pluck them from a human embryo several days after fertilization, destroying the embryo in the process.

The reprogrammed skin cells may yet prove to have subtle differences from embryonic stem cells that come directly from human embryos, and the new method includes potentially risky steps, like introducing a cancer gene. But stem cell researchers say they are confident that it will not take long to perfect the method and that today’s drawbacks will prove to be temporary.

Researchers and ethicists not involved in the findings say the work should reshape the stem cell field. At some time in the near future, they said, today’s debate over whether it is morally acceptable to create and destroy human embryos to obtain stem cells should be moot…

The two independent teams, from Japan and Wisconsin, note that their method also creates stem cells that genetically match the donor without having to resort to the controversial step of cloning. If stem cells are used to make replacement cells and tissues for patients, it would be invaluable to have genetically matched cells because they would not be rejected by the immune system. Even more important, scientists say, is that genetically matched cells from patients will enable them to study complex diseases, like Alzheimer’s, in the lab.

But with the new method, human cloning for stem cell research, like the creation of human embryos to extract stem cells, may be unnecessary…

Still, the new work could allow the field to vault significant problems, including the shortage of human embryonic stem cells and restrictions on federal funding for such research. Even when scientists have other sources of funding, they report that it is expensive and difficult to find women who will provide eggs for such research…

The reprogrammed cells, the scientists report, appear to behave exactly like human embryonic stem cells.

“By any means we test them they are the same as embryonic stem cells,” Dr. Thomson says.


Needless to say, the NYT does not mention President Bush, or the ban on federal funding for expanded embryonic stem cell research he put in place nearly six years ago… a ban which in some way may be responsible for this most recent breakthrough.

As witness the NYT Company’s stock price, the editors and publishers of the so-called “paper of record” know precious little about markets and incentives. But the fact of the matter is incentives DO work, and Mr. Bush was clearly right all along. Morally and scientifically.

Comments

Avatar for Mr. Gunn

Let me quote the last line of the actual paper for you:

Human iPS cells, however, are not identical to hES cells: DNA microarray analyses detected differences between the two pluripotent stem cell lines. Further studies are essential to determine whether human iPS cells can replace hES in medical applications.

So, no, he wasn’t.  He’s made lots of very smart people waste great amounts of time, energy, and money for something of questionable utility.

Mr. Gunn on November 20, 2007 at 04:56 pm

Mr Gunn:

So, no, he wasn’t.  He’s made lots of very smart people waste great amounts of time, energy, and money for something of questionable utility.

My, how catty.

Embryonic stem cells have limited or no medical utility, as you admit on your own website.

First there’s the issue if scalability to general treatment protocols:  How do you harvest the 10’s of thousands of stem cells needed to treat one patient?

Secondly the complete totipotency of ESCs is a huge problem for implanting them into a host, simply because they become cancerous (teratocarcinoma). 

Third there is the issue of how you suppress the autoimmune response from the foreign DNA of so many donors.

The best medical option is the conversion of ordinary cells into more limited types of t-cells (e.g., neural t-cells to treat nerve damage) from the patient being treated.

Limiting how much federal money goes into human ESC studies is probably beneficial to pushing research in the direction it needs to go.  But even if neither procedure yields medically significant treatment options, so what? 

There is still good science to be learned from it, so your suggestion that it needed to have “utility” for it to not be a waste, frankly is rather ignorant on your part.

There is a lot to be learned from the study of ESCs, but one must balance that against the ethics questions, no matter how much people want to turn this into another campaign issue.

Carrick on November 20, 2007 at 05:17 pm

Carrick,

Wow!!!  I bow to your superior wisdom… as should “Petey.”

Game… Set… and Match!


“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Bat One on November 21, 2007 at 08:39 am
Avatar for Jan

My main problem with the press coverage is remarks like

Dr. Thomson said straightforwardly, “By any means we test them they are the same as embryonic stem cells.”

I see this as adding to the confusion that already exists. There has to be kept a clear definition of embryonic and adult stem cells. They are defined according to where they come from - not according to the way they behave. This procedure uses stem cells from the skin (ADULT) not from an unborn (EMBRYONIC).

Dr. Thomson’s remark should have been, “By any means we have tested them they appear to be able to turn into every type of cell in the human body as embryonic stem cells do under the ideal conditions of the womb.”

We must insist on the definition of embryonic and adult stem cells as being defined according to where they come from so that legislation isn’t passed to support this new procedure with wording that would allow funding to inadvertently go to embryonic stem cell research.

Jan on November 21, 2007 at 06:07 pm
Avatar for The Scientific Activist

No mention of President Bush?  Good God, are you crazy?  Bush was all over the article that you linked to.  In fact, it looks like you pretty much included every paragraph except for those that mentioned him by name.  And, did you miss this one, which slobbers over him every chance it gets?

The Scientific Activist on November 21, 2007 at 06:48 pm
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses. Confirm your email address here.

    

By submitting your comment you agree to our terms of service.