First Embryonic Stem Cell Clinical Trial Imminent 224
An anonymous reader writes "California-based Geron has announced that the first embryonic stem cell trial may be in the not-so-distant future. Tom Okarma, Geron's CEO, recently announced that the company will be seeking permission from the FDA to begin clinical trials. From the article: 'Geron's plan is to treat people that have acute spinal injuries with oligodendrocyte progenitor cells grown from human ESCs. Oligodendrocyte cells support neurons in the brain and spine by sheathing them in myelin, a fat that helps neurons to transmit signals.'"
Move along... (Score:3, Funny)
...there's nothing to sheathe here.
(I'm sorry.)
Re:Move along... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Move along... (Score:3, Funny)
Result of Propostion 71? (Score:5, Informative)
I believe this was the result of propostion 71 that was passed in California last year. It allocated $3 billion over a period of ten years to fund stem cell research! Way to go California :)
http://religiousfreaks.com/ [religiousfreaks.com] http://psychicfreaks.com/ [psychicfreaks.com]Re:Result of Propostion 71? (Score:4, Funny)
Next up... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Next up... (Score:4, Funny)
We already have those. They are called motorcyclists. Emergencey response teams don't call them "organ doners" for nothing.
Re:Next up... (Score:2)
Re:Next up... (Score:2)
I've heard that the helmet is used to protect the head, so that it's easier to identify the decapitated body.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Next up... (Score:2)
Nobody's posting anything interesting in reply. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Nobody's posting anything interesting in reply. (Score:2)
Re:Nobody's posting anything interesting in reply. (Score:2)
I think www.debian.org might have some information on how to cure the disease known as MS.
Re:Nobody's posting anything interesting in reply. (Score:2)
It might be useful to repair damage if someone figures out how to reliably stop the deterioration though.
Re:Nobody's posting anything interesting in reply. (Score:2)
babybooms, as we age, will need these technologies (Score:4, Interesting)
With these new upcoming technologies (stem cells, bio/nanotech) we will be able to, in the next couple of dacades, to slow and reverse the aging process so that in this competitive world enviroment, you won't be tossed out on the junk heap when you reach 40.
The only way this is going to happen is for people to push science and technological research forward and demand that this be done (instead of, say invading other countries).
Remeber, in the future, when we can reprogram cells and easily as we write programs today, people growing up will be taking their nano-reguvination/enhaced intelegence/memory/internet-connect-mind-thought-
Re:babybooms, as we age, will need these technolog (Score:5, Funny)
Sure that's a third eye on your elbow, but it's a feature, for free too.
Re:babybooms, as we age, will need these technolog (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:babybooms, as we age, will need these technolog (Score:2)
Move Further... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Move Further... (Score:5, Insightful)
That's a pretty ridiculous thing to say. Yes, pharmaceutical companies want to make a buck, but scientists are human beings and many of them are doing their best to create the best drugs they can to help people. To think that they're intentionally withholding drugs or not trying to cure diseases to keep making money is simply ridiculous and paranoid.
There are tons of people working to cure cancers, Parkinson's, AIDS, Alzheimer's, and other diseases. If you think otherwise, you don't know anything about medical research. The fact that these things aren't yet cured is not from a lack of trying. There's still a great deal about the human body we don't know. There's tons about stem cells we don't understand. The human body is so amazingly comlpex, it's incredible that we can do the things we can do already.
Remember, drug companies and researchers came up with a number of vaccines for diseases that no longer plague us. Bacterial infections are fatal about 1/1000th as often as they used to be, thanks to the work of drug companies.
Don't get me wrong, they're not charity organizations and I'm not trying to make them out to be that. They're trying to make money for their stockholders, and that's their job. The people who work for them are trying to cure diseases, though. That's their job.
Re:Move Further... (Score:2, Insightful)
Sorry, it's not. Between a cure and a treatment, drug companies will pick the treatment. Those scientists might want to save the world, but they signed an NDA t
Re:Move Further... (Score:2)
Re:Move Further... (Score:2)
Well, ideally.
Unfortunatly, they're in bed together [hamiltonspectator.com]. So it's not a given.
Re:Move Further... (Score:4, Insightful)
Well...
I'll certainly give the scientists their due. The question becomes how much control does the company have over the directions the scientists' research takes them?
Here's sort of how I see it: I have no doubts that the drug companies are hard at work attempting to develop an AIDS vaccine. Are they attempting to work on a cure? Because, let's face it, there are far more people who are concerned about getting AIDS and would like a vaccine than there are people who have AIDS. I'm sure the research that goes into an AIDS vaccine will immeasurably help to develop a cure. But which pill would you expect to see on the market first--the cure or the vaccine?
Re:Move Further... (Score:2)
Re:Move Further... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Move Further... (Score:2)
Re:Move Further... (Score:2)
Anyway, they weren't specifically looking for ED treatme
Re:Move Further... (Score:2)
What about the HPV vaccine approved less than a month ago?
Yes, they're creating things like Viagra -- Hugh Hefner's favorite recreational drug -- but that's not the only thing.
Re:Move Further... (Score:2)
Move over to nations with socialised healthcare systems and you'll find it's the government absorbing the costs of these pharmaceuticals. You may also find governments have much more clout when bargaining with pharmaceutical companies than the individual directly footing the bill. And then there's us here in the UK where direct marketing of prescription drug
Re:Move Further... (Score:2)
Re:Move Further... (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, that's not really it at all, but thanks for playing. Avastin has been used by retinal specialists to treat wet macular degeneration (and presumed ocular hisoplasmosis syndrome, but that affects far fewer people so there aren't any real studies done with it as yet.) When retinal specialists got the idea to use an angiogenesis inhibitor to treat MD, the real problem was the size of the Avastin molecule. They were concerned that it was too large to penetrate the retinal membrane and thus wouldn't be effective against MD. Genentech immediately went back to the drawing board and developed Lucentis which is a smaller molecule that can more easily penetrate the retinal membrane.
In the meantime, retinal specialists have been using Avastin with some success, but it's believed that Lucentis will be more successful because of the smaller molecule size. Genentech doesn't license the drug for a purpose, the FDA approves it for a purpose. The fact is that there have been no large scale trials with Avastin. The largest I know of is this one [nih.gov] by Avery et.al. which had only 79 participants. But now that Lucentis is out, there are official trials being done with it and assuming it passes (which it appears all but certain that it will), it will probably be significantly better at treating MD than Avastin.
Re:Move Further... (Score:2)
That's the point. It's not up to Genentech. Within reason, doctors can choose the drug they give their patients. If retinal specialists determine or clinical trials show that Avantis is better than Lucentis, then the retinal specialists are going to use it. I suspect the price difference between the two will actually be far less than than the numbers you're clearly pulling out of your ass. (Avantis is about $300 per shot.) Not as much research had to go into the devel
Re:Move Further... (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't think you'll ever be happy. We already live in the era when people have a good chance of living into old age. Time was, before antibiotics, almost half of all infants died before their first birthday. Of those people who made it past age 1, half of them died before age 30. So only about 25% of the people born ever made it to old age.
Here in the US, the average male life span is 75.2. Welcom
Re:Move Further... (Score:2)
It will never happen. Republicans are running all three branches of government, and smart pills would be the end of them.
My fellow republicans ... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:2)
People die, every day, all the time. I would rather have deaths with a purpose. If you could even calls these embryo's life anyway. As far as I know, the embryo's being used have no future, and to put it bluntly, are destined for the trash otherwise.
And yes, I am a registered organ donar.
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:2)
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:2)
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:2)
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:2)
Anything that they don't understand which their doctor has told them cannot help them personally with their problems.
This mentality will be immediately reversed if this type of therapy proved to be successful one hour after any high ranking republican politician suffers a spinal injury or has a stroke.
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:2)
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Ah, they already are... sometimes... and this is the big problem with this debate...
You see, a mother has the right to an abortion without it being declared murder but if you kill a woman who is pregnant for even a single day you'll get hit with two counts of murder. Isn't the double standard great? Basically, from a very legal standpoint the government has decided that depending on the mothers state of mind determines if a fetus is a human, the fetus itself is just a bystander.
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:2, Insightful)
Cogito ergo sum
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:2)
As far as 'kind of thoughts' this is quite easy. A recognition of self. Prior to recognition of self, how can we 'kill' somthing that does not even know that it *is*?
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:2)
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:2)
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:2)
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:2)
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:2)
Other segments of society (Score:2)
[emphasis mine]
Other segments? Are little specs of goo with no nervous system and less interactive personality than a lab rat, a "segment of society?"
If Yes, then I guess I see the point.
But I see the hypothesis as absurd. No segment of society is being used here, no one is suggesting that some underclass be abused (which would be of alarming concern), so there is no scary risk here
Re:Other segments of society (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:3, Insightful)
And clearly, a large number of scientists believe that embryonic stem cells hold promise that adult stem cells do not, claiming otherwise is just falsifying the evidence to try to support yo
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:2)
Re:My fellow republicans ... (Score:2)
The unspoken Importance of Procedural Science (Score:4, Insightful)
An interesting example is as follows:" A fluorescence-activated cell sorter. [nih.gov] A cell passing through the laser beam is monitored for fluorescence. Droplets containing single cells are given a negative or positive charge, depending on whether the cell is fluorescent or not. The droplets are then deflected by an electric field into collection tubes according to their charge. Note that the cell concentration must be adjusted so that most droplets contain no cells and flow to a waste container together with any cell clumps."
The empirical scientists that correctly implement such challenging procedures are rarely mentioned.
Re:The unspoken Importance of Procedural Science (Score:2)
Lecithin, Myelin & Sciatica (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Lecithin, Myelin & Sciatica (Score:2)
The reason modern medical science stays away from these miracle all-purpos elixirs has nothing to do with conspiracy and evertying to do with the scientific method. Since the effects are so varied and often not particularly pronounced, it is often impossible to isolate them in any stastically meaningfully way.
disclaimer: IANAMD.
hooray for nth place (Score:2)
"First" my least significant bit (Score:2)
To respond to an early reply re: "smart pills". The first one was patented so long ago the patent has expired. It was invented by Albert Hoffman. He's remembered for inventing LSD, but he deserves a Nobel for inventing nootropics.
Spe
Re:Overlords (Score:3, Funny)
Just a thought.... (Score:2)
But seriously, this can set up some pretty interesting dilemmas, assuming you value highly the life of both, say, a sick child and a fetus (even ASSUMING that the stem cells come from fetuses). Even if you value them equally, there's no reason to make such a decision in favor of the fetus by default. Either way you're killing something.
But what I'm really afraid of is that, despite whatever scientific significance such a trial could have,
Re:Just a thought.... (Score:5, Insightful)
What frightens me is that even with proven advances in adult stem cells, some people squelch it for research that has inherent problems with the body rejecting the cells. These people claim that anti-science religious groups are attacking them. Huh?
Re:Just a thought.... (Score:2)
On "take your child to work" day, a mother brings her eight year old daughter into the in vitro fertilization lab where she works. She leaves her child at a desk in her office to go to the restroom. On her way back, she is accosted by a co-worker and speaks with her for a few minutes. Unbeknownst to her, an electrical fire breaks out in a wall between a lab and her o
Re:Just a thought.... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Just a thought.... (Score:2)
Re:Just a thought.... (Score:2)
And anyway, why would you expect him to use a millsian ethical paradigm in the first p
Re:Just a thought.... (Score:2)
Most people agree that destroying another person to further one's own life is wrong. The argument is as to whether a fetus is a person. I, personally, do not believe that it is safe to assume that a
Re:Overlords (Score:3, Insightful)
They are cloning embryonic progenitor stem cells, and while you might at first glance think they are killing babies or mothers to obtain those initial cells, they might not be. I'd be exceedingly surprised if they were, because there are laws against that sort of thing.
How about if they obtained the initial cells from umbilical cord blood? I don't believe that there is any way to turn unbilical cord blood into a huma
Re:Overlords (Score:2)
Re:Overlords (Score:2)
Not that I agree with your values on this issue... but your grasp of the facts is correct.
Re:Overlords (Score:3)
Re:Overlords (Score:2)
Re:Overlords (Score:2, Interesting)
Nope. Freedom does not give life but it makes life worth living. We'd probably live much longer if we took away our freedoms of deciding what to eat (replacing it with a health plan that has been tested thoroughly to guarantee maximum health) or to drive cars individually (enforcing use of public transportation instead, which of course would be more developed in such a scenario). Giving up guns would reduce the number of gun-related deaths, banning
Re: (Score:2)
What do you eat? (Score:2)
Re:Overlords (Score:2)
Well I suppose it is good then they aren't destroying life. Embryonic cells are obtained from fertility clinics which would have thrown them out anyways.
Secondly, embryos don't have sentient life nor do they have counciousness.
And lastly, if you believe in a kind loving god, then we can be assured no embryos are going to hell for something they have no control over.
Re:Overlords (Score:2)
I'm not qualified to answer that concretely, but I will say at what point I don't consider an embryo living. At the point of conception. Here's a sperm, here's an egg. Here's a chemical reaction. There's a zygote. This is all well and good, but that alone is not enough to make me grant what were previously two small single cells the full distinction of "human being" I afford to my friends and neighbours.
So when does
Re:Overlords (Score:2, Interesting)
here: http://www.physorg.com/news67783446.html [physorg.com]
or, a site you trust: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jun/06060508.html [lifesite.net]
According to the second site there, only 10-15% of preganncies "spontanteous abort", "Ninety percent of all such abortions are due to rejection of a maldeveloped embryo or fetus".
That means 1%-2% of healthy babies are natu
Re:Overlords (Score:2)
Between the closing of the door and the removal at then end, there is a continuum of states of varying cakiness, but while a cake cooked for a half-hour might not be done enough, a slightly smaller cake cooked for the same time might be.
Si
Re:Overlords (Score:2)
Re:Overlords (Score:2)
Re:Overlords (Score:2)
Re:Overlords (Score:2)
Re:Overlords (Score:2)
Absolutly
Re:Overlords (Score:2)
Re:Overlords (Score:2)
Except that the Bible doesn' directly speak to the point of human life beginning. If anything, it implies that human life has an immortal soul, but give no indication at what point a developing human gets a soul, nor if that's the determining factor. Even now, the Catholic Church has no position on exactly when ensoulment happens, and common law had no punishment for abortion before "quickening" -- when
Re:Overlords (Score:2)
Re:Alcomohol (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Alcomohol (Score:2)
Re:Alcomohol (Score:2)
There are also effects of alcohol besides resistance between neurons.
Re:Alcomohol (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Alcomohol (Score:2, Informative)
Myelin is rather like the insulation on a normal household electric cable. It doesn't actually carry the current, but stops the currrent from grounding out before it gets to its destination. So, to translate (and my apologies to the parent for any loss in translation):
"Myelination from oligodendrocytes just increases the ability of an already generated action potential to
ESC (Score:2)
Won't someone please think of the vi users?