Page 5 of 280 FirstFirst 12345678910111213141555105 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 2792

Thread: ChinaSCINet Update

  1. #41

    centeral cord

    hey im a c3 incomplete central cord, my legs work good but my arms hardly work. have u heard anything on stem cells helping my condition.

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnnie Walker View Post
    thank you for your reply, Dr, Young as always

    but what about the people in Europe and other parts of the world where clinical trials are not busy at the time, ho long they should wait, Can we not in the meantime go to USA or China to private clinics when the therapies have been approven, so that we dont have to wait one or two or maybe more years, than the people in USA and China,

    ''every day is ti long belive me''

    tanks again
    Johnnie,

    Much depends on the doctors in the country and how fast they adopt a therapy. It doesn't matter if you can get regulatory approval if the doctors in the country have not yet bought into the concept and treatment. We will likely be starting a trial in Norway and possibly elsewhere in Europe by 2011. So, there will be some places in Europe that will provide the therapy.

    Even after the phase 3 trial, there will be unanswered questions. For example, we don't know what the best rehabilitation procedure is to maximize recovery. It is possible that longer lithium treatment may be better. These questions will be answered in subsequent trials. Things will move much faster after an initial success. At the present, we are working with shoestring funding and a lot of good will.

    Wise.

  3. #43
    Dr Wise,
    You are injecting Real HOPE (not placebo into this, broken spine community.
    Thank you!
    www.MiracleofWalk.com

    Miracles are not contrary to nature, but only contrary
    to what we know about nature
    Saint Augustine

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by james18 View Post
    hey im a c3 incomplete central cord, my legs work good but my arms hardly work. have u heard anything on stem cells helping my condition.
    james18, there is a lot of talk about stem cells but very little data showing that it works in humans. I do not trust any of the claims by the various groups that claim that they are implanting stem cells into the spinal cord for money. These groups have not published data indicating the safety and efficacy of their treatment. Most of them are making unsubstantiated claims of efficacy and safety.

    In theory, stem cells should help the spinal cord in three ways. First, the cells may produce growth factors that stimulate regeneration of spinal nerves up and down the spinal cord. Second, the cells may fill the injury site and provide a bridge from the axons to grow across the injury site. Third, the cells may replace neurons and other cells in the spinal cord.

    The first possibility is the most likely one right now for many of the so-called "stem cell transplants" that doctors are implanting into the spinal cord. Stem cells do put out growth factors that are known to stimulate regeneration. For example, umbilical cord blood mononuclear cells release neurotrophins that stimulate regeneration in the spinal cord of animals.

    The second possibility is also likely. Many cells will fill the injury site. However, some cells will stimulate the spinal cord to react and wall them off. For example, fibroblasts (skin cells) tend to do this. Umbilical cord does not do this. Some cells migrate all over the place. Fortunately, umbilical cord blood cells do not migrate all over the place. They tend to stay close to where they are implanted and will fill the injury site.

    The third possibility is still some time off in the future. While animal studies have shown that embryonic stem cells or neural stem cells will produce new neurons in the spinal cord, the new cells must not only grow axons (nerve fibers) that contact other neurons in the spinal cord but they must receive contacts with the body's own stem cells.

    Most of the so-called stem cell therapies that are being offered by medical tourism clinics are unlikely to do any of the three. For example, many clinics are giving umbilical cord blood cells intravenously (into the veins) or bone marrow cells intrathecally (into the cerebrospinal fluid surrounding the cord). In both of these cases, the cells will not get into the injury site and therefore are unlikely to produce growth factors that will stimulate growth, bridge the injury site, or replace local neurons or motoneurons.

    Bone marrow cells taken from yourself of course would be immune-matched to your body but it is a little worrisome injecting cells that normally make blood into the spinal cord. Stem cells obtained from aborted fetuses (such as fetal neural stem cells, olfactory ensheathing glia, etc.) are not matched to the recipient. Therefore, they are very likely to be immune-rejected unless the patient is immune-suppressed with drugs such as cyclosporin or FK506.

    Some doctors claim that stem cells know how to "home to the injury site". In our experience with animals, this is not true. Intravenously administered cells do not get into the spinal cord injury site. Other doctors believe that intrathecally administered cells will somehow migrate to the injury site but I don't believe that they do. Usually, cerebrospinal fluid flows downward. Therefore, injection of the cells through a lumbar puncture would result in accumulation of the cells in the lower spinal cord and cauda equina.

    In the case of our clinical trial, we have sought to address all of these problems. First, we are using HLA-matched umbilical cord blood cells so that they are not immune-rejected or at least not as quickly. Second, the cells are being injected directly into the spinal cord above and below the injury site. We have shown that the such transplanted cells will migrate into the injury area and provide a bridge across the injury site. Third, we have shown that lithium strongly stimulates the cells produce neurotrophins. Therefore, our trials will compare the results of transplanting umbilical cord blood cells with and without lithium.

    Wise.

  5. #45
    Thank you so much Dr. Young
    keep (rolling) Walking

    Please join me and donate a dollar a day at http://justadollarplease.org and copy and paste this message to the bottom of your signature

  6. #46
    Wise, you've explained about cell nerve growth; what about remyelination? Are your therapies providing for remyelination .

    Thaniks in advance
    keeping on

  7. #47
    Remember gimps- what can go wrong will, so focus on your home therapy plan and get whatever works working better.

  8. #48
    Also, an outfit like Beikie does a lot of good. You get a month of intensive PT with your stem cell treatments and it is well-documented that intensive PT will help SCI people immensely even long after injury. Beikie cost somewhat less than a month of PT at project walk, plus your fee includes housing and you get to pig out on cheap chines take-out food. With 40% of folks getting a boost from the placebo effect, it is a good buy, just maybe advisable for us skeptics to skip the injections.

    No, I have not been there.

    We do owe it to people at this point to advise against medical tourism that involves any injections or surgery due to the oncoming tsunami of anti-biotic resistant bugs. Or should we just call them antibiotic immune bugs?
    Last edited by Tetracyclone; 09-12-2010 at 09:44 AM. Reason: Left out a bit.

  9. #49
    hi dr.wise,

    i ask one of the private hospitals in china about using
    HLA-matched umbilical cord blood cells . this was their reply

    ''The stem cells we use have little immunogenicity, so we needn't
    consider about HLA-matching problem. We do not combine growth factors
    with cells. We know that some groups in China and overseas are
    undertaking research in this area including Lithium. It is very
    promising for the future. However at present nobody has studied
    sufficiently the differentiation of stem cells when growth factors are
    added. We do not have enough understanding and experience in it. We
    believe the best and safest way is to transplant stem cells in their
    natural state. We know they are stable. Also, we have not met any
    problem with HLA-matching. We claim this based on our research and
    clinical experience with 2125 patients.''

    would you say this is true?

    Thank u

  10. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by td_trust View Post
    hi dr.wise,

    i ask one of the private hospitals in china about using
    HLA-matched umbilical cord blood cells . this was their reply

    ''The stem cells we use have little immunogenicity, so we needn't
    consider about HLA-matching problem. We do not combine growth factors
    with cells. We know that some groups in China and overseas are
    undertaking research in this area including Lithium. It is very
    promising for the future. However at present nobody has studied
    sufficiently the differentiation of stem cells when growth factors are
    added. We do not have enough understanding and experience in it. We
    believe the best and safest way is to transplant stem cells in their
    natural state. We know they are stable. Also, we have not met any
    problem with HLA-matching. We claim this based on our research and
    clinical experience with 2125 patients.''

    would you say this is true?

    Thank u
    I assume that you asked the hospitals that are treating patients with cells provide by Beike Biotechnology. In my opinion, there is no evidence that the treatment that they provide or their route of administration results in recovery of patients. To my best understanding, based on their public talks on the subject, they are infusing non-HLA matched CD34+ cells intravenously or intrathecally into patients. Two decades of experience with intravenous infusion of umbilical cord blood has shown clearly that intravenously administered and non-HLA-matched umbilical cord blood cells are usually immune-rejected within several days. Beike Biotechnology has not provided any evidence to contradict this. In that respect, their statement that their cells are non-immunogenic is false.

    They give the cells intrathecally to many of their patients. I believe that cells administered through this route will not get into the spinal cord injury site or the spinal cord surrounding injury site. The reason is because cerebrospinal fluid flows distally (downward). The cells are likely to end up in the cauda equina. Thus, I am skeptical that this approach would restore function to any of the their patients.

    Finally, I am perturbed by their unsupported claims of efficacy and safety. They have claimed (including on this site) that the treatment is effective in 80% of patients and safe in 100% of the patients. I have never seen any data to support this statement. They have never published a peer-reviewed article on this subject. They are charging large sums of money for a therapy that has not been shown to be safe or effective and making unsupported claims for the the safety and efficacy of the treatment. In my opinion, this is unethical and I do not recommend this therapy or group.

    Wise.

Similar Threads

  1. ChinaSCINET Update
    By Schmeky in forum Cure
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-16-2008, 06:25 PM
  2. ChinaSCINET on Schedule?
    By Schmeky in forum Cure
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-27-2008, 05:53 AM
  3. Dr. Young and ChinaSciNet
    By Imight in forum Cure
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 01-14-2008, 12:51 AM
  4. ChinaSCINET Schedule
    By Schmeky in forum Cure
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-11-2007, 04:30 AM
  5. ChinaSCINET, On Schedule?
    By Schmeky in forum Cure
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 01-30-2007, 03:46 PM

Posting Permissions

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