Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 91

Thread: Scientist receives $1.8M defense grant from Kessler Foundation for spinal cord injury

  1. #81
    Senior Member Moe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Springfield
    Posts
    493
    Name:  dogma.jpg
Views: 178
Size:  30.0 KB

  2. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by Moe View Post
    Name:  dogma.jpg
Views: 178
Size:  30.0 KB
    It's not dogma. You can easily question or doubt the authority on it's claim of spinal cord complexity. You are free to email Dr. Martin Schwab or Michael Fehlings and question them on why they said what they said. Feel free to email the author of one of the medical textbooks, Anthony L. Mescher, and ask why he wrote what he wrote. But you won't because you are both lazy and quite frankly, out of your element.

    As for me, I will put my trust in the medical textbooks and neuroscientists.

  3. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by Moe View Post
    Name:  dogma.jpg
Views: 178
Size:  30.0 KB
    Posts like this are unhelpful

  4. #84
    Quote Originally Posted by Nowhere Man View Post
    It's not dogma. You can easily question or doubt the authority on it's claim of spinal cord complexity. You are free to email Dr. Martin Schwab or Michael Fehlings and question them on why they said what they said. Feel free to email the author of one of the medical textbooks, Anthony L. Mescher, and ask why he wrote what he wrote. But you won't because you are both lazy and quite frankly, out of your element.

    As for me, I will put my trust in the medical textbooks and neuroscientists.
    Accepting claims without understanding them is dogmatic. You are claiming muscle tissue and bone tissue is "much simpler" than spinal cord tissue. You could source sections in the text book comparing bone tissue, muscle tissue, and spinal cord tissue to make your points. Instead you cite "the nervous system is 'by far the most complex' (does not describe muscle, bone, or spinal cord tissue) in the human body and that 'Nerve tissue is the most complex tissue in the body (how so? how does it make muscle and bone tissue much simpler than spinal cord tissue?)'" and common sense. I've cited Dr. Fehlings to you in the past (it wasn't a video). You are very good at regurgitating what you've heard in videos. My main point is to show the forum you do not know what you are talking about.
    Last edited by crabbyshark; 05-07-2014 at 03:12 AM.

  5. #85
    Quote Originally Posted by Nowhere Man View Post
    --I believe they have helped fund Dr. Silver's attempt at creating a peptide that could help dissolve chronic scar tissue. There is good reason to believe that chronic scar is an obstacle to regeneration.
    Can you explain how the peptide dissolves scar tissue?


    1. Science. 2009 Oct 23;326(5952):592-6. doi: 10.1126/science.1178310. Epub 2009 Oct 15. PTPsigma is a receptor for chondroitin sulfate proteoglycan, an inhibitor of neural regeneration. Shen Y(1), Tenney AP, Busch SA, Horn KP, Cuascut FX, Liu K, He Z, Silver J, Flanagan JG. Author information: (1)Department of Cell Biology and Program in Neuroscience, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA. Chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans (CSPGs) present a barrier to axon regeneration. However, no specific receptor for the inhibitory effect of CSPGs has been identified. We showed that a transmembrane protein tyrosine phosphatase, PTPsigma, binds with high affinity to neural CSPGs. Binding involves the chondroitin sulfate chains and a specific site on the first immunoglobulin-like domain of PTPsigma. In culture, PTPsigma(-/-) neurons show reduced inhibition by CSPG. A PTPsigma fusion protein probe can detect cognate ligands that are up-regulated specifically at neural lesion sites. After spinal cord injury, PTPsigma gene disruption enhanced the ability of axons to penetrate regions containing CSPG. These results indicate that PTPsigma can act as a receptor for CSPGs and may provide new therapeutic approaches to neural regeneration.

  6. #86
    I don't understand all this dogma talk. One can find knowledge from a theoretical approach or empirical. From experience I'm 100% sure gravity exists, by I have no idea how it works(actually nobody does). If you give 10 sci something and they walk and 10 others that don't then that's strong evidence even if you can't explain it. If we fully could explain the processess in the human body clinical research wouldn't be needed. Now is this not the case and that is why the results from these studies are so important. Nowhereman presents statements from credible scientists, argue why they are wrong or show something that argues against!

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim View Post
    Everyone has an opinion.

    Those who say it is not time for SCI human clinical trials are simply wrong.
    Isn't this dogma then?
    Debating on CareCure is like participating in the special-olympics. You may win, but you're still disabled.

  7. #87
    Senior Member Moe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Springfield
    Posts
    493
    Quote Originally Posted by crabbyshark View Post
    Posts like this are unhelpful
    I had no idea what dogma meant, I'm sure some members neither so I posted this showing what was the definition to help others to understand what you and Now Where man's arguing over and over on something completely off-topic, derailing this thread that I started. In my opinion, just let him think whatever he wants, you're turning this into a pissing contest that has no end. Case you're concerned of unhelpful posts.
    Last edited by Moe; 05-07-2014 at 01:23 PM.

  8. #88
    Senior Member khmorgan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    366
    Quote Originally Posted by Moe View Post
    I had no idea what dogma meant, I'm sure some members neither so I posted this showing what was the definition to help others to understand what you and Now Where man's arguing over and over on something completely off-topic, derailing this thread that I started. In my opinion, just let him think whatever he wants, you're turning this into a pissing contest that has no end. Case you're concerned of unhelpful posts.
    Amen.

  9. #89
    Senior Member Moe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Springfield
    Posts
    493
    Quote Originally Posted by Nowhere Man View Post
    It's not dogma. You can easily question or doubt the authority on it's claim of spinal cord complexity. You are free to email Dr. Martin Schwab or Michael Fehlings and question them on why they said what they said. Feel free to email the author of one of the medical textbooks, Anthony L. Mescher, and ask why he wrote what he wrote. But you won't because you are both lazy and quite frankly, out of your element.

    As for me, I will put my trust in the medical textbooks and neuroscientists.
    ??As for your comments of saying that I'm Lazy and out of element, I didn't ask your opinion on anything, so your boring childish 'know it all' comments with that snotty attitude are unnecessary this time. I don't care at all in what your opinions are so your words mean nothing to me. What I think and/or don't, shouldn't concern you neither. So get a room and go bark at someone else who gives you that kind of attention if you're that desperate.
    Last edited by Moe; 05-07-2014 at 08:25 PM.

  10. #90
    Quote Originally Posted by crabbyshark View Post
    Can you explain how the peptide dissolves scar tissue?
    When did I ever say it did?

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-20-2009, 02:36 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-01-2007, 02:01 PM
  3. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-10-2003, 08:08 AM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-19-2002, 11:07 AM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-27-2001, 06:31 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
  •