Jerry Silver and Other Discussion from ChinaSCINet Update

[Moe]

and to think that you were the one bitching about off topic posts. Then you make all these off topic posts. Moe... Back on topic!!!!

eum...

'Jerry Silver and Other Discussion from ChinaSCINet Update '

if you go back a few posts you'll understand what I'm talking about and you will see I'm within topic. I was discussing this with interested members as you could notice. Sorry to spoil your evening and hope you'll sleep tonight. The discussions here were based on scar removal or not... tell me where I went wrong and why this reaction.

Moe

[SmashingPumpkinds]

Jerry, Dr. Young has provided us with references and research to support his claims. You claim that he is the only one in the field who still holds these beliefs but you have provide us with no references to research that is in support of your view. Even your current work is under review and is therefore of no use. Can you provide us with research studies to help substantiate your "scar" theory?

[Le Todd]

They say not to discuss politics and religion, I'm beginning to think we should add cures to that.

[lunasicc42]

my bad moe. I realize now that it was none of my concern.... Go home Lunasicc42, you are drunk

[GRAMMY]

You claim that he is the only one in the field who still holds these beliefs but you have provide us with no references to research that is in support of your view. Can you provide us with research studies to help substantiate your "scar" theory?

Here's a link to 1,120 references to research studies you can review.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=glial%20scar

[paolocipolla]

I attach a reprint of the paper. If I remember correctly, most of the rats were euthanized at 6 weeks after injury. The BBB scores of the rats with 25 mm weight drop injuries averaged about 8 (non-walking). We studied 3 contusion levels, i.e. the 12.5, 25.0, 50.0 mm, about 150-200 rats per group.

Wise.

Thank you Wise for the publication.

I see the rats were euthanized within 6 weeks as you say which is a bit too early to call it chronic especially if we are talking about the scar.

Then I see that even with the 50 mm drop SCI model (which I think is rarely used if ever as a contusion model) rats recover a BBB score of 8 out of 21, which would be probably like an ASIA C human.

So when you refer to this study to support your position about the scar you could be right if we were talking about the scar present in people ASIA C or D.

Unfortunatly people with ASIA A likely have a much worse scar problem, which I wish had been studied more rather than just saying the scar is not an issue.

Paolo

[paolocipolla]

I just spoke to Oslo for you and they said that you should plan your own trial Paulo and start harassing yourself instead.

Solan,

thank you for your effort, so if I get it right, that means that there is NO clinical trial planned in Norway with UCB cells as Wise keep saying.

That also explains why Leif ignored my question when I asked him.

Paolo

[paolocipolla]

Paolo,

Penetrating wounds of the spinal cord are relatively rare.
Ok, but what would you do in this case?

For example, we did not see any case of a penetrating or transecting wound of the spinal cord in 41 ASIA A patients that we transplanted cells into so far, 28 of which are chronic and 13 were subacute. All the spinal cord appear intact from the outside. We inject the cells into the spinal cord surrounding the injury site, into the dorsal root entry zones above and below the injury site.

Yep! Unfortunatly the inclusion criteria of the trial exclude people with more devastating SCI.
C'mon Wise let's be serious.

Yes, Liu, et al. 2010 did assess regeneration in "acute" spinal cord injury, in the sense that the rats already had PTEN deleted before they were injured. On the other hand, the regeneration across the injury site took a long time. Kai Liu had to wait 6-8 weeks before he saw the axons grow across the injury site. In rat and mouse time, each week is equal to about a month. If a glial scar formed, it should have been there within 2-3 weeks.

In fact the more robust grow happens in the first two weeks.

It seems to me that the burden of proof should lie on those people claiming that there is a "scar" that obstructs axonal growth rather than on people who don't see any scar there and are finding axons that grow into the contusion site. If a scar is there and is truly blocking axonal growth in contused spinal cords, why are we seeing so many axons crossing the injury site in the chronically injured spinal cord?

Then why these axons you are talking about don't grow out of the injury site and make functional connections?


Wise.

Paolo

[paolocipolla]

Subacute? Which trial is this? I was under the impression that of the patients in both the Hong Kong and Kunming trials were chronics....I went back and saw you mention these subacute patients a few times and also checked clinicaltrials.gov which seems to have a separate trial for acutes and subacutes (NCT01471613)... Is it right to assume then that you were talking about the improved locomotor, sensory, motor scores in terms of chronic patients? If not, are the subacutes getting the intradural decompression? I'm sorry if you've clarified before but suddenly I'm very confused....and I think it would just be nice to know if your personal observations from before were from chronics or subacutes. Thanks!

Good questions, I would like to know the answers too.

Paolo

[paolocipolla]

so no one ever looked at a cadaver sci spinal cord?

Good question!

I wonder how many histology of cadaver SCI spinal cord Wise has done....

Probably the Miamy Project does that, but I am not sure, anyone knows?

Paolo