Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 123456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 128

Thread: Embryonic stem cell discussion

  1. #21
    Senior Member kate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    bellevue, wa, usa
    Posts
    10,992
    Quote Originally Posted by DA
    concrete steel wall or 1 man wall made with tissue paper, either way the wall was still there and still to strong for an apathetic pro-esc crowd to break down. and if you can't break down the wall, GO AROUND. dont stand there like a freakin idiot complaining, which is exactly what happened. now tell me, kbailey, what has 8 years complaining accomplished?
    silly. There were people who didn't bother complaining, but instead took things into their own hands, and they live in California.

    November 2004: They passed an initiative authorizing the spending of $3 billion on hESC over 10 years. Ahem. This is like . . . if JFK had refused to authorize money to get NASA going, and Texas had decided to say the hell with him and funded the moon landing themselves. It was a big fat eff yoo to W.

    That initiative, btw, had 59.1% support, in spite of a crap economy. Does this sound like an apathetic pro-esc crowd? NO. It sounds like sentient human beings determined not to let a fool of a president stand in the way of their health. Did it mean research going forward? Ha ha ha. It meant, of course, legal challenges filed by fools who think their personal faith statements are determinative for every man, woman, and child in the USA. Not arrogant at all, of course.

    July 2006: George W Bush vetoes a bill that would have permitted the NIH to fund hESC. Fool. The Republican governor of California responds 2 days later by authorizing a $150M loan to the institute that will eventually be charged with spending the money the initiative said to spend. Yay, Arnold!

    May 2007: Legal challenges from the Christian right failed in the California supreme court. Case closed. Money finally starts flowing to labs.

    Result? Thanks to the citizens of CA and some very determined advocates, there is a structure in place, several very well-equipped and well-staffed labs, and YEARS saved in spite of George W Bush and his foolish supporters.

    What were ASC advocates doing during all this time? Can you show me anything at all?

  2. #22
    Kate, I am so glad that you brought this up. Proposition 71 was the solution to George W. Bush and the misguided right-to-life groups who have gone well beyond their original mandate and now are spending most of their time and effort doing things that are hurting people. California is now spending more money on stem cell research than all of NIH.

    A lot of people, such as DA, think that all we have to do is study animal stem cells. It turns out that stem cells from non-human species are very different from humans. So, for example, although we have know how to grow mouse embryonic since the 1970's, it took over 30 years of research to discover how to grow human embryonic stem cells and it is different.

    In 1998, I assumed that I could study rat embryonic stem cells. After all, rats are a lot like mice. It turns out that nobody has successfully been able to grow rat embryonic stem cells. In fact, the first embryonic stem cell study in rat was by John McDonald and he implanted mouse embryonic stem cells into spinal-injured rats. The animals had to be treated with cyclosporin and we recently found that cyclosporin prevents regeneration in rats.

    It is just bad to restrict science. There is so much that we don't know and cannot predict. Interestingly, there are some apologists who claim that George w. Bush's restriction of embryonic stem cells was actually good for the field. The claim goes as follows. it takes a lot of time and effort to understand one stem cell line. By restricting all of NIH's funding on stem cells to the so-called "presidential" lines, we now know a lot more about a few lines. The problem is that there were so few laboratories in the United States doing embryonic stem cell research between 2000-2008 that we never reached critical mass and able to make the great leap forward.

    NIH spent less than 1% of its entire budget on stem cells.

    Wise.


    Wise.



    Quote Originally Posted by kate
    silly. There were people who didn't bother complaining, but instead took things into their own hands, and they live in California.

    November 2004: They passed an initiative authorizing the spending of $3 billion on hESC over 10 years. Ahem. This is like . . . if JFK had refused to authorize money to get NASA going, and Texas had decided to say the hell with him and funded the moon landing themselves. It was a big fat eff yoo to W.

    That initiative, btw, had 59.1% support, in spite of a crap economy. Does this sound like an apathetic pro-esc crowd? NO. It sounds like sentient human beings determined not to let a fool of a president stand in the way of their health. Did it mean research going forward? Ha ha ha. It meant, of course, legal challenges filed by fools who think their personal faith statements are determinative for every man, woman, and child in the USA. Not arrogant at all, of course.

    July 2006: George W Bush vetoes a bill that would have permitted the NIH to fund hESC. Fool. The Republican governor of California responds 2 days later by authorizing a $150M loan to the institute that will eventually be charged with spending the money the initiative said to spend. Yay, Arnold!

    May 2007: Legal challenges from the Christian right failed in the California supreme court. Case closed. Money finally starts flowing to labs.

    Result? Thanks to the citizens of CA and some very determined advocates, there is a structure in place, several very well-equipped and well-staffed labs, and YEARS saved in spite of George W Bush and his foolish supporters.

    What were ASC advocates doing during all this time? Can you show me anything at all?

  3. #23
    Banned Schooch1282's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    NJ and AZ
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by Wise Young
    Kate, I am so glad that you brought this up. Proposition 71 was the solution to George W. Bush and the misguided right-to-life groups who have gone well beyond their original mandate and now are spending most of their time and effort doing things that are hurting people. California is now spending more money on stem cell research than all of NIH.

    A lot of people, such as DA, think that all we have to do is study animal stem cells. It turns out that stem cells from non-human species are very different from humans. So, for example, although we have know how to grow mouse embryonic since the 1970's, it took over 30 years of research to discover how to grow human embryonic stem cells and it is different.

    In 1998, I assumed that I could study rat embryonic stem cells. After all, rats are a lot like mice. It turns out that nobody has successfully been able to grow rat embryonic stem cells. In fact, the first embryonic stem cell study in rat was by John McDonald and he implanted mouse embryonic stem cells into spinal-injured rats. The animals had to be treated with cyclosporin and we recently found that cyclosporin prevents regeneration in rats.

    It is just bad to restrict science. There is so much that we don't know and cannot predict. Interestingly, there are some apologists who claim that George w. Bush's restriction of embryonic stem cells was actually good for the field. The claim goes as follows. it takes a lot of time and effort to understand one stem cell line. By restricting all of NIH's funding on stem cells to the so-called "presidential" lines, we now know a lot more about a few lines. The problem is that there were so few laboratories in the United States doing embryonic stem cell research between 2000-2008 that we never reached critical mass and able to make the great leap forward.

    NIH spent less than 1% of its entire budget on stem cells.

    Wise.


    Wise.

    The point about just studying a few lines and now we know them better is very much like what you say about doing a trial on cord blood. If it doesn't work at least we know it.

  4. #24
    Banned Schooch1282's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    NJ and AZ
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by kate
    What were ASC advocates doing during all this time? Can you show me anything at all?
    Promoting and even still promoting a non-controversial crdpa

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Schooch1282
    The point about just studying a few lines and now we know them better is very much like what you say about doing a trial on cord blood. If it doesn't work at least we know it.
    I disagree. As I explained in another topic, there are no embryonic stem cells available for clinical trial. The few lines that are available are not HLA-matchable (and I believe that they will be immune-rejected). For a while, there was some excitement about cloned embryonic stem cells but that tuened out to be a scam. I even met with Woo Suk Hwang twice. The only three choices of immune-compatible cells that we have are: mesechymal stem cells from one's own bone marrow, neural stem cells from one's own brain, or HLA-matched umbilical cord blood cells.

    Umbilical cord blood cells have stem cells and the HLA-matched stem cells are known to engraft in various tissues. Half a dozen studies have reported beneficial effects of umbilical cord blood in rat spinal cord. Several clinics (such as Beike Biotechnology at Shenzhen) are charging patients $30,000 or more for infusions of umbilical cord blood. I therefore chose to do cord blood cells as the first. If it doesn't work, we will say so and go to other cells. If it works, that is great.

    Wise.

  6. #26
    Banned Schooch1282's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    NJ and AZ
    Posts
    101
    Are you saying Geron's cells will be immune rejected?


    Quote Originally Posted by Wise Young
    I disagree. As I explained in another topic, there are no embryonic stem cells available for clinical trial. The few lines that are available are not HLA-matchable (and I believe that they will be immune-rejected). For a while, there was some excitement about cloned embryonic stem cells but that tuened out to be a scam. I even met with Woo Suk Hwang twice. The only three choices of immune-compatible cells that we have are: mesechymal stem cells from one's own bone marrow, neural stem cells from one's own brain, or HLA-matched umbilical cord blood cells.

    Umbilical cord blood cells have stem cells and the HLA-matched stem cells are known to engraft in various tissues. Half a dozen studies have reported beneficial effects of umbilical cord blood in rat spinal cord. Several clinics (such as Beike Biotechnology at Shenzhen) are charging patients $30,000 or more for infusions of umbilical cord blood. I therefore chose to do cord blood cells as the first. If it doesn't work, we will say so and go to other cells. If it works, that is great.

    Wise.

  7. #27
    Senior Member DA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    beaumont tx usa
    Posts
    32,389
    Quote Originally Posted by Wise Young
    DA, I seem to remember that you supported Bush in the last election. Am I mistaken? If you didn't support him, please tell me now and I will apologize and applaud you. When a president works against the will of the people, it is up to the people to vote him out of office. Regarding CR, look at what they have done to the CRPA because he did speak up. Look at the decline in spinal cord injury research funding during the last four years.

    Wise.
    dr young you continue to pretend not to see my point so you can place all blame on bush. we had the opportunity to go around. we could have been 4 years closer. but no, you and this comminuty decided to play politics. i have said it before, politics is more important than cure to this forum. in a poll i ran last month, the majority said they would rather remain paralyzed then see mccain win. nothing else needed, all is said in that poll.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Schooch1282
    Are you saying Geron's cells will be immune rejected?
    Schooch,

    I believe so. That is why even Hans Keirstead was talking about life-time immunosuppression with cyclosporin at the April Rally this year. Geron claims that their cells are immune-privileged but most scientists are not convinced. They are not immune-privileged when transplanted into rats. Embryonic stem cells themselves may escape immune rejection but their differentiated progeny are likely to be rejected.

    I have transplanted many kinds stem cells into animals. I have never seen a stem cell allograft (from another animal) or xenograft (from another species) that is not rejected by the immune system of an immune-competent animal. It doesn't matter whether they are embryonic stem cells, neural stem cells, or umbilical cord blood stem cells. I am working with several groups that say that they can find cells that are not immune-rejected.

    Mesenchymal stem cells collected from Wharton's jelly for umbilical cord or from placenta are believed to be anti-immune. They are in fact using these cells to treat graft-versus-host-disease and the first trial has shown positive results, just this week. Perhaps adult mesenchymal are anti-immune but I don't believe that the cells produced by embryonic stem cells are necessarily immune-privileged.

    The above is the reason why scientists have been working so hard to do "therapeutic cloning". That is why induced pluripotent stem cells is so exciting to so many scientists right now.

    Wise.
    Last edited by Wise Young; 08-18-2008 at 11:49 PM.

  9. #29
    Senior Member DA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    beaumont tx usa
    Posts
    32,389
    Quote Originally Posted by kate
    silly. There were people who didn't bother complaining, but instead took things into their own hands, and they live in California.

    November 2004: They passed an initiative authorizing the spending of $3 billion on hESC over 10 years. Ahem. This is like . . . if JFK had refused to authorize money to get NASA going, and Texas had decided to say the hell with him and funded the moon landing themselves. It was a big fat eff yoo to W.

    That initiative, btw, had 59.1% support, in spite of a crap economy. Does this sound like an apathetic pro-esc crowd? NO. It sounds like sentient human beings determined not to let a fool of a president stand in the way of their health. Did it mean research going forward? Ha ha ha. It meant, of course, legal challenges filed by fools who think their personal faith statements are determinative for every man, woman, and child in the USA. Not arrogant at all, of course.

    July 2006: George W Bush vetoes a bill that would have permitted the NIH to fund hESC. Fool. The Republican governor of California responds 2 days later by authorizing a $150M loan to the institute that will eventually be charged with spending the money the initiative said to spend. Yay, Arnold!

    May 2007: Legal challenges from the Christian right failed in the California supreme court. Case closed. Money finally starts flowing to labs.

    Result? Thanks to the citizens of CA and some very determined advocates, there is a structure in place, several very well-equipped and well-staffed labs, and YEARS saved in spite of George W Bush and his foolish supporters.

    What were ASC advocates doing during all this time? Can you show me anything at all?
    $3 billion is 3 times more then what we need for a cure... so where is the cure?

  10. #30
    Senior Member DA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    beaumont tx usa
    Posts
    32,389
    Quote Originally Posted by Wise Young
    A lot of people, such as DA, think that all we have to do is study animal stem cells. It turns out that stem cells from non-human species are very different from humans. So, for example, although we have know how to grow mouse embryonic since the 1970's, it took over 30 years of research to discover how to grow human embryonic stem cells and it is different.
    .
    hmmm, funny how that works. so animal research is very different from humans so its best to start on human esc HOWEVER animal research in esc is needed to apply therapies to humans. a never ending loop that never allows for a cure.

Similar Threads

  1. New Jersey Stem Cell Symposium
    By Wise Young in forum Cure
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-30-2007, 10:29 PM
  2. Replies: 40
    Last Post: 03-21-2007, 02:14 PM
  3. Adult Stem Cells vs Embryonic Stem Cells
    By smithpl in forum Cure
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 02-24-2006, 11:11 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-18-2005, 03:52 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •