backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 166 comment(s) - last by Hawkido.. on Jul 8 at 5:16 PM


An overview of the process. Note researchers can use any mouse tissue (the blue box) as the starting point for iPS creation. The method features less manipulation, reducing the cancer risk and produces, for the first time genetically identical cells. It also has higher yields.  (Source: Tom DiCesare/Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research)
Welcome to the stem cell revolution

There has been an ongoing moral debate in the U.S. which has crippled the funding of stem cells and left the future of stem cell research uncertain.  Fortunately, about a year ago, scientists made an exciting breakthrough -- ordinary adult cells in mammals could be reprogrammed with viruses to become pseudo-stem cells.  By eliminating the moral debate, the research reopened the door to one day developing treatments for Parkinson's Disease, Sickle Cell anemia, paralysis, and many other debilitating afflictions.

However, the pseudo-stem cells created from mice skin cells, known as induced pluripotent stem (IPS) stem cells, were not genetically identical like fetal stem cells, and required different methods of triggering for every tissue.  Now scientists with Rudolph Jaenisch's lab at the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research have discovered a way to transform any type of tissue into a stem cell and ensure all the produced stem cells are genetically identical.

The transformation is triggered by the simple release of a drug; no additional genetic manipulation is necessary.  Marius Wernig, one of the paper's two lead authors and a postdoctoral researcher at the lab stated, "This technical advancement will allow thousands of identical reprogrammed cells to be used in experiments."

"Using these cells could help define the milestones of how cells are reprogrammed and screen for drug-like molecules that replace the potentially cancer-causing viruses used for reprogramming," added Christopher Lengner, the other lead author and also a postdoctoral researcher at the lab.

Lengner alluded to an important fear with the current method.  Past efforts used viruses to induce the transformation and it was found that the viruses could trigger cancer.  A batch of stem cells could unwittingly contain cancer cells that could do far greater damage to the diseased person's body than the ailment they're being treated for.

While the new research still uses viruses, it is different in two important ways.  First the viruses target a specific spot in the genome.  Past efforts inserted genes anywhere in the genome, raising the likelihood of cancerous mutation.  In the new research, lentiviruses artificial viruses, are used to randomly insert four genes (Oct4, Sox2, c-Myc and Klf4).  All mice cells processed thusly have the same number of viral integrations in the same location within the genome.  This both leads to genetically identical stems cells and cuts the cancer risk.

The second important way the research is different is that in its specificity, researchers can now focus on developing replacement molecules to the viruses, eliminating the cancer threat.  The old research only worked on skin cells, so the focus was on developing different methods that could trigger various tissues to become IPS cells.  The new method can trigger virtually any cell -- including cells from the intestine, brain, muscle, kidney, adrenal gland, and bone marrow -- into becoming an IPS cell.

After the cell is transformed, the cell was further modified to wait to switch on these genes upon a doxycycline trigger.  This allowed researchers to control when they wanted to transform the cells into stem cells, with a simple chemical.  The new method is much more efficient, with yields up from one in a thousand cells to one in twenty.

Jaenisch, who is also a professor of biology at Massachusetts Institute of Technology said, "In experiments, the technique will eliminate many of the reprogramming process's unpredictable variables and simplify enormously the research on the reprogramming mechanism and the screening for virus replacements."

The research can be found here in the July 1, 2008, online issue of Nature Biotechnology.

Funding for the research was provided by the Human Frontiers Science Organization Program, the Ellison Medical Foundation, the Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award, and the National Institutes of Health.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By michal1980 on 7/2/2008 11:39:04 AM , Rating: 5
not a ban on the research itself.

As far as I know, a private company can do research on embyro stem cells, as long as the study is not funded by the federal goverment.

The amount of ignorance of posters on this issue here is funny.

esspically when you consider that they think the president is an idiot. Wheres that mirror.




By daftrok on 7/2/2008 3:04:02 PM , Rating: 4
I agree with everything you said...until you said that the president is NOT an idiot:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EvNJWM_NDg

Yeah....


By masher2 (blog) on 7/2/2008 4:44:28 PM , Rating: 5
Your premise is incorrect. Morality and ethics have every place in politics. The fact those ethics are motivated by religion is irrelevant...the very nature of politics is the expression of an ethical position in terms of action.

While I happen to sharply disagree with Bush's ethical position in this, it's important to debate the topic rationally and honestly.


By Bender 123 on 7/2/2008 5:47:03 PM , Rating: 5
Please remember Mr. Bush, for all his issues is not Catholic and i am insulted to have him lumped in with it.

as to the serious point you are making, Religion is little else than Codified ethics and morality. There is no connection between freedom and ethics, in fact it is possible (however unlikely) that there can be a benevolent/ethical dictator.

There is a strong sense of religion in this country, that affects all things, because thats how we were built. If you dont want religious view points in our country, nothing is stopping you from electing an atheist, but you need to have a majority share to get there.

As for the point about stem cells saving lives, where do you put your values? Remember, the chicken has little skin in the game when it comes to your eggs for breakfast, but the pig is all in when you eat bacon. Same goes for embryos, either they are people or not, define that and then build an argument that supports it...Its exceedingly difficult and far more intelligent people than us have been unable to do so, so why do you feel that your belief is any more valid than someone elses?


By masher2 (blog) on 7/2/2008 6:57:36 PM , Rating: 4
> "Is it ethical to make a woman who was raped and inpregnated be required to have the baby?"

You're still missing the point. If a person believes abortion is unethical, they have a right to engage the political process to have it declared illegal. The fact their beliefs may be motivated by religious reasons are irrelevant.

Saying "religion has no place in politics" is an utterly nonsensical statement. People support laws which fit their ethical code. For anyone who is religious, their ethics are defined by their religious beliefs. Your statement equates to saying people shouldn't have the right to freedom of religion, which is certainly one of the more fanatically horrifying beliefs a person can hold.


By Ringold on 7/2/2008 8:29:48 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Saying "religion has no place in politics" is an utterly nonsensical statement.


I think the breakdown between his side and your own is straightforward. He believes government should only represent a liberal, secular ideology, where as you believe the government should represent whatever the wishes and values of the voters may be.

He makes it clear, however, he's not an American, so I for one forgive him of his ridiculous ignorance of our founding fathers, their beliefs, and the prevailing sense of what government should represent. Religion has been a fundamental part of the prism through which our government has viewed policy choices since, literally, day one.

In case European liberals need help, from Washington's first Inaugural Address:

quote:
Such being the impressions under which I have, in obedience to the public summons, repaired to the present station, it would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official act my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being who rules over the universe, who presides in the councils of nations , and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that His benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the people of the United States a Government instituted by themselves for these essential purposes, and may enable every instrument employed in its administration to execute with success the functions allotted to his charge.


By phattyboombatty on 7/2/2008 7:01:48 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
I agree morality and ethics do have every place in politics but those ethics get skewed because of religious beliefs.

One could easily define religion as a person's set of moral and ethical beliefs that they live by. Thus, your statement doesn't make any sense. What you probably mean is that your moral and ethical beliefs have every place in politics but those ethics get skewed because of the moral and ethical beliefs of other people.
quote:
You live in what you call the land of the free, yet denying stem cell research funding which may potentially cure many diseases and many people.

How does the government not spending money on certain research deny anybody their freedom? There is no right in the USA to a free handout from the government.
quote:
Those so called ethics stem from a heavy catholic influence especially for Mr. Bush.

As a previous poster mentioned, President Bush is not a Catholic, which you infer.
quote:
Not long ago 30 states were ready to make abortions illegal. Once again heavily influenced by Catholic ideologies.

Let me just point out that opposition to abortion does not rest exclusively with Catholics. In my experience, the majority of Christian denominations oppose abortion. Also, there is no need to be a Christian to be opposed to abortion. Fundamentally, whether a person opposes or supports the right to abortion depends on the answer to a single question--At what point in a baby's development does it acquire rights as a person to be protected by the state? Some people answer "at the point of inception." Others say after the first or second trimester. There is no scientific way to answer this question, so it necessarily depends purely on policy grounds, with both sides offering compelling arguments.
quote:
Is it ethical to make a woman who was raped and inpregnated be required to have the baby?

Is it ethical to force a husband to endure the shame of his wife's adultery by not allowing him to kill his wife?
Is it ethical to allow a mother to kill her one-year-old baby who she no longer wants because the baby is taking up all her free time. After all, who are we to tell the mother what she can and can't do with her own child.
quote:
In the land of the free you deny gays the right to marry which is once again backed up by religious overtones.

Marriage itself is full of "religious overtones." The federal government does not deny anybody the right to marry. States are free to decide for themselves whether to recognize or not recognize gay marriage. Its called democracy. And some states do recognize gay marriage, but most don't. Furthermore, no state denies anybody the right to get married, they just don't endorse or recognize certain marriages such as same-sex marriages, polygamist marriages, marriages between closely related persons, etc. "The land of the free" doesn't mean a free for all where anything goes. It means the People are free to decide issues democratically, rather than a tyrant deciding for them.
quote:
Bush is continuously quoted with the use of the word God in many of his speeches. He refers to the good book guiding him and his faith and uses it as his excuse for trying to bring freedom to places like Iraq and Afghanistan through war.

And so did almost every previous leader in the USA. Get over it. If you take away all the religious motivation of prior influential people in this country, our country would probably be split in two, there would still be slaves, and there would be very few civil rights.
quote:
At the same time he is doing little in terms of providing for the people of his country.

This country was founded by people who wanted the government to leave them the hell alone. That's what makes this country unique. Every other country in the world is full of citizens that simply want handouts from their government and feel it is their right that every need be satisfied by the almighty government. We don't want Bush "to provide for us." We want him to stay out of our way and let us make our own lives.


By mikeyD95125 on 7/3/2008 3:44:12 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Is it ethical to force a husband to endure the shame of his wife's adultery by not allowing him to kill his wife? Is it ethical to allow a mother to kill her one-year-old baby who she no longer wants because the baby is taking up all her free time. After all, who are we to tell the mother what she can and can't do with her own child.


A rape victim having an abortion is not about shame though. It is about a woman not being able to carry the burden of child she had no fault in creating.


By Myg on 7/3/2008 8:33:04 AM , Rating: 5
The child has no fault in being created either, so why perpetuate the cycle of fear and misdeed with more victims?

To assert a dominion over the child and be judge/jury and executioner makes the woman no different in essence then the person who did the same to her by violating her body.

It is often said that the bullied becomes the bully; which is a very wise observation, if looked at properly. It would reveal that the pain and emptyness caused by the bully leaves a gap which needs to be filled, which the person who was bullied tries to close this gap by trying to copying the actions done to them in order to try and undo what happened to them.

We all know this doesnt work and at times constitutes "revenge", thats no good. What these victoms of rape need, is not a way to make it appear as though it never happened. They need our Love and caring, our unwavering support and dedication to see they they are looked after.

You are right, it isnt mostly out of shame; infact most women in these circomstances look at their life and decide out of what supports they have. What abortion does is disrupt the natural healing process. It removes a wonderful and unique creation that is the child, it removes a chance for the women to properly heal personally from it (abortion always causes emotional scars) and it denies us, as a society a chance, and an opportunity to share Love and support to others.

Rape is a trajedy and a destructive force against the fabric of society, just as much as abortion is. So why continue the cycle of violence?

Concerning the defition of "Life", that is pointless; because we know and scientifically define a child at conception, "Life". We even concern sperm and eggs with such defintions. The issue with most people is defining wether the child in early stages is a human being AKA:"one of us". Of course it is, and that is scientifically proven by the fact that it wont be anything else; observations of the human growth cycle/DNA anyone?

Anyways, back to the topic at hand please.


By phattyboombatty on 7/3/2008 9:39:03 AM , Rating: 3
The examples weren't meant to be exactly analogous. They were intended to show that many crimes which you may not even give a second thought to have very similar ethical dilemmas.

As I mentioned in my previous post, each of these ethical questions turn on whether the victim is recognized as a life worth protecting.


By Frallan on 7/3/2008 10:32:21 AM , Rating: 3
Masher - for once we acctually agree on something, well at least mostly agree on something LoL.

I agree that morality and ethics has its place in politics - acctually I would even say that morality and ethichs together with law and a a touch of pragmatism should be the basic fundament in politics (would be good if it was so in reality huh?). However Religion should have no place in politics more then as part of the fundaments of our morality and ethical values. Once the boreder is crossed where religion becomes a driver in politics it has crossed into very murky waters.

However as u stated it is good that the religious beliefs of our politicians is discussed openly so that eac of us can make an informed decision.


By Denigrate on 7/2/2008 1:46:34 PM , Rating: 5
Not sure of actual percentages, but the vast majority of money from private investors goes into adult stem cell research, because that's where the actual progress has been made. Embryonic stem cells supposedly has potential, but nothing has actually been accomplished using them to my knowledge.

If adult stem cells can cure disease, then there is absolutely no reason for embryonic research.