Page 24 of 54 FirstFirst ... 141516171819202122232425262728293031323334 ... LastLast
Results 231 to 240 of 532

Thread: Jerry Silver and Other Discussion from ChinaSCINet Update

  1. #231
    Jerry, I sincerely hope that the right people get to develop the chase and peptide technologies so that they end up benefitting sci people as intended.

    Surely the European owner of Adcon could make it available in the US - what a ridiculous situation it is when business gets in the way of the true purpose of medicine. I am not a big fan of the big drug companies although I know I am probably at their mercy like most of us - the dollar is way more important to them than saving lives.

  2. #232
    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher Paddon View Post
    Geoffrey Raisman once told me "a cure has to be a collaborative effort." I remember on a documentary he said that although he had found what he thought was an important piece of the puzzle it was no more all of it than if they were trying to build a brick cathedral and here he was standing with one brick in his hand. It may be made of bricks, if it were a brick cathedral, but you can't build the whole thing in one go and it will take the collaborative effort of many people.

    Geoffrey Raisman was the first person to use an electron microscope and observe that the brain constantly made new connections - he was laughed at by the scientific community but it is now an accepted fact that the brain is plastic.

    Anyway, all I'm saying is that someone like Jerry can work on his area(s) of expertize and, as Grammy says, collaborate with whomever it is necessary to continue the work forward.

    The idea of one gallant researcher independently concocting a cure from start to finish is overly simplistic.
    Could they skype or call each other on the phone or read each other's research online? Is this not happening?

    Has Jerry Silver tried injecting stem cells, by themselves, near the injury site of a spinal cord injured rodent?

    Jerry on the chronic cord: axons that were cut have died back . . . there’s a dense wall full of stem cells surrounding the lesion with a moat of nothing in between. They can sit there for decades.
    SOURCE

    Where is the proof of this?

    Cellular and extracellular inhibitors are thought to restrict axon growth after chronic spinal cord injury (SCI), confronting the axon with a combination of chronic astrocytosis and extracellular matrix-associated inhibitors that collectively constitute the chronic “scar.” To examine whether the chronically injured environment is strongly inhibitory to axonal regeneration, we grafted permissive autologous bone marrow stromal cells (MSCs) into mid-cervical SCI sites of adult rats, 6 weeks post-injury without resection of the “chronic scar.” Additional subjects received MSCs genetically modified to express neurotrophin-3 (NT-3), providing a further local stimulus to axon growth. Anatomical analysis 3 months post-injury revealed extensive astrocytosis surrounding the lesion site, together with dense deposition of the inhibitory extracellular matrix molecule NG2. Despite this inhibitory environment, axons penetrated the lesion site through the chronic scar. Robust axonal regeneration occurred into chronic lesion cavities expressing NT-3. Notably, chronically regenerating axons preferentially associated with Schwann cell surfaces expressing both inhibitory NG2 substrates and the permissive substrates L1 and NCAM in the lesion site. Collectively, these findings indicate that inhibitory factors deposited at sites of chronic SCI do not create impenetrable boundaries and that inhibition can be balanced by local and diffusible signals to generate robust axonal growth even without resecting chronic scar tissue.
    SOURCE

    Am I reading this wrong?

  3. #233
    Quote Originally Posted by jsilver View Post
    My primary mission in doing SCI research is to help bring whatever good we do in our lab to people.

    So you are utterly wrong that I don’t wish to bring my science to the people. In terms of funding, you may be referring to a statement that I made at my first W2W symposium.

    Of course, there is a need for more funding, but I think we can make substantial progress with the money that is available now in the field of SCI if we keenly focus our efforts worldwide on CHRONIC SCI models
    I am personally of the opinion that you and others doing research genuinely want to help people or you would certainly not have engaged in the field. You choose to stay at what I probably incorrectly refer to as bench/lab research. Others do translational work. Some may even do a little of both.

    I know that this tends to be the nature of the beast. My frustration over many years is what appears to be many efforts advancing pretty much alone (and this is directed at no single individual). I have turned down many requests to join somebody's advisory group unless they agree along with other researchers to have some common advisory or board members so the theories can be compared and maybe a common mechanism discovered.

    The field is better than is was ten years ago and the various symposiums have done a lot to open discussion among researchers.

    If I wanted to enter the field as a young researcher I doubt I would if I read here or most any place on the internet. We as a group can come across as ungrateful, demanding and inpatient (well the impatient part is understandable). My hat is off to those of you who do respond. Doctors in general hide behind schedulers and office staff because they don't have time to answer because they are treating patients. I really do not have sympathy for the busy claim. I likely have a lot more employees than they do and some days believe I am busy too. :-)

    I also believe we are a long way to any "cure" and that it will require some type of cells or pharmacological intervention combined with intense therapy. The connections are highly unlikely to line up as they were originally so retraining with repetitive motion and proprioceptive feedback will have to be part of it.
    Last edited by c473s; 01-21-2013 at 07:40 PM. Reason: clarity

  4. #234
    IMO helping people motivates some researchers, but for others, solving a puzzle consumes them. (Think: House)

    Quote Originally Posted by c473s View Post
    My frustration over many years is what appears to be many efforts advancing pretty much alone (and this is directed at no single individual).
    This is the blessing and the curse of competition. Competition drives researchers to work extremely hard at making their therapy the one that "wins." It's this desire to win that probably keeps some from sharing information with one another.

    Quote Originally Posted by c473s View Post
    I have turned down many requests to join somebody's advisory group unless they agree along with other researchers to have some common advisory or board members so the theories can be compared and maybe a common mechanism discovered.
    Do you think an advisory board would lead to politicking, lobbying, or perhaps even in some cases, bribery?

  5. #235
    Quote Originally Posted by crabbyshark View Post
    Do you think an advisory board would lead to politicking, lobbying, or perhaps even in some cases, bribery?
    I can say absolutely no to all these after watching those involved in those capacities that I know well. They simply have not collaborated with others well. There have recently been multi-center trials because the reality of getting numbers enrolled in decent numbers do not happen in a single center trial.

  6. #236
    Quote Originally Posted by NowhereMan View Post
    No, my axons are not growing in my body. The spinal cord does not regenerate. That is why there are scientists trying to figure out a treatment that will get it to regenerate. Your post quoting Wise was him discussing hypothetical axon growth, not what occurs naturally in the spinal cord. This is not open to debate, it is fact.
    Your axons are regrowing in your body.

    Live imaging has revealed that unconditioned axons can show some initial sprouts and grow during the first few days after injury. However, further regeneration of these sprouts could not be assessed by histological approaches. We observed regeneration of a few unconditioned axons in chronically injured spinal cords, albeit less extensively than conditioned axons. Most of these axons protruded the peripheral zone of the lesion showing less than 7% of the axonal volume within the inner 150μm region (Fig. 4d,f). Moreover, along their trajectories they intersected only three times with the cylindrical planes (Fig. 4g). These axons were readily unveiled by 3D imaging because of their abnormal trajectories (Supplementary Fig. 10a) and identifiable tips (Supplementary Fig. 11), the key criteria for unequivocally distinguishing regenerating axons from spared axons, which course on their normal path until the edge of imaged tissue segment and show no identifiable tip (Supplementary Fig. 10a). By contrast, conventional histological sectioning would reveal only axon fragments (Supplementary Fig. 10b–h) omitting key information, including a defined axonal tip and trajectory. Hence, regenerating axons would be indistinguishable from spared axons by conventional sectioning. Thus, our data indicate that unconditioned axons not only show some initial sprouting but regenerate if they can bypass the lesion.
    IF ONLY SOMETHING EXISTED THAT COULD HELP YOUR REGENERATING AXONS BYPASS THE LESION.

    It is notable that 3D imaging also revealed regrowth of unconditioned axons after chronic injury, highlighting a previously underestimated regenerative potential. Because clearing and subsequent 3D imaging allow the tracing of axons up to their tip, it enables unequivocal identification of regenerative axons versus spared axons.
    SOURCE
    Last edited by crabbyshark; 01-21-2013 at 11:23 PM. Reason: added link

  7. #237
    Quote Originally Posted by crabbyshark View Post

    Your axons are regrowing in your body.

    IF ONLY SOMETHING EXISTED THAT COULD HELP YOUR REGENERATING AXONS BYPASS THE LESION.

    SOURCE

    Are you high?

  8. #238
    Quote Originally Posted by NowhereMan View Post
    Are you high?
    No.

    Quote Originally Posted by NowhereMan View Post
    No, my axons are not growing in my body. The spinal cord does not regenerate.
    The spinal cord regenerates. This regrowth is being inhibited (not ceased, inhibited). Some suggested factors inhibiting regeneration include:
    the scar
    chemicals in your spinal cord
    your immune system

    Scientists are trying to determine how to best deal with whatever is inhibiting regeneration/regrowth/whatever you want to call it so that the spinal cord can regenerate much better.

    It's like if you were driving down the road and the speed limit was 5 MPH. Scientists are trying to figure out to raise the speed limit to 60 MPH.

    Quote Originally Posted by NowhereMan View Post
    This is why there are scientists trying to figure out a treatment that will get it to regenerate.
    This is why there are scientists trying to figure out a treatment that will get it to regenerate better.

    Quote Originally Posted by NowhereMan View Post
    Your post quoting Wise was him discussing hypothetical axon growth, not what occurs naturally in the spinal cord.
    He's talking about actual axon growth man.

    It is notable that 3D imaging also revealed regrowth of unconditioned axons after chronic injury, highlighting a previously underestimated regenerative potential. Because clearing and subsequent 3D imaging allow the tracing of axons up to their tip, it enables unequivocal identification of regenerative axons versus spared axons.

  9. #239
    Quote Originally Posted by GRAMMY View Post
    Stephen Huhn, MD and Aileen Anderson PhD take questions and answers about the StemCells Inc. trial for chronic spinal cord injury.

    http://www.u2fp.org/educate/
    Hmm...interesting to hear in this video something that crabbyshark suggested. That is that the chronic stage may have some characteristics that make it more amenable to cell transplantation. If you don't have time to watch, Aileen Anderson says that, in their rodent models, they found that when the therapy is given at 9 days, 30 days and 60 days post injury they get recovery of function with the same transplantation protocol. They have to, however, change this protocol to get recovery after immediate transplation of the cells (acute).

  10. #240
    Grammy
    She also says it will 10 to 15 years ? But when you listen to all the other videos the researchers seems to think we will see .Big things this year or is it only me thinking that
    AS I SIT HERE IN MY CHAIR . I LOOK OUT UPON THE GROUND .I WONDER WILL I EVER GET UP AND WALK A ROUND ??


    http://justadollarplease.org

Similar Threads

  1. ? for jerry silver
    By havok in forum Cure
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 08-29-2012, 07:34 PM
  2. Jerry Silver talks to me
    By Christopher Paddon in forum Cure
    Replies: 118
    Last Post: 06-10-2012, 09:53 AM
  3. open question to wise and jerry silver
    By lunasicc42 in forum Cure
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 12-16-2011, 02:26 PM
  4. jerry Silver wins Javits Award
    By Max in forum Funding, Legislation, & Advocacy
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-10-2004, 09:51 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
  •