August 5, 2005
BUT IT'S NOT ABOUT THE SCIENCE:
Option to stem cells found: Pitt experts say placental cells offer palatable alternative (Byron Spice, August 05, 2005, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)
University of Pittsburgh researchers have discovered that one type of cell in the human placenta has characteristics that are strikingly similar to embryonic stem cells in their ability to regenerate a wide variety of tissues.The cells, called amniotic epithelial cells, potentially could be used to produce new liver cells to treat liver failure, or new pancreatic islet cells to cure diabetes or new neurons to treat Parkinson's disease.
Unlike embryonic stem cells, which are obtained only by destroying human embryos, these cells can be extracted from the same placentas that now are routinely discarded after birth. They thus could be a non-controversial alternative to embryonic stem cells.
"We think it would be easier to get these to the clinic than [embryonic stem] cells," said Stephen Strom, an associate professor of pathology at the Pitt medical school.
Not only do amniotic epithelial cells lack the controversy of embryonic stem cells, but they also do not generate the tumors associated with embryonic stem cells, he said. So it may be possible in some cases to simply transplant the amniotic cells to a patient, rather than to first grow the desired specialized cells in the laboratory.
Embryonic cells must be destroyed for ideological reasons--the devaluing of human life--not because they're medically useful. Posted by Orrin Judd at August 5, 2005 9:12 AM
No, you ninny. Did you notice the phrase "have discovered"? In other words, it wasn't known before. Then read the part that says "it may be possible". What you might deduce from this is that scientists are looking for alternative sources of pluripotent cells.
If you could get over the ideologically-driven notion that stem-cell researchers are Frankensteins.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) at August 5, 2005 11:22 AMoj is only being slightly unfair here--his statement should read "Embryonic cells must be destroyed for ideological reasons--the religiously motivated must be opposed at all times--not because they're medically useful."
The behavior of Nature and Science, which are supposed to be THE distinguished and legitimate journals for the entire scientific community, on stem cell research in the past decade has been utterly shameful (just as that on global warming has been for the past two decades or so). They're destroying their own credibility out of spite.
Posted by: b at August 5, 2005 11:24 AMMillions of people are, right now, killing themselves by stuffing junk food down their gullets, lighting up coffin-nails, swilling hooch, and mainlining or snorting the controlled substance du jour. Millions more are dying due to lack of basic nutrition, medical care, and sanitation.
Dealing with these issues would do vastly more to improve quality and length of life than embryonic stem-cell research. There is no medical necessity driving it forward.
Posted by: Chris B at August 5, 2005 3:32 PMChris B:
One could say the same about every treatment since penicillin.
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at August 6, 2005 8:24 AM