New Source of Stem Cells Discovered

Not a lot of time to post, so I'll just throw the link your way. Link.

I hope this can stay non-P&C. What I take from this article is that these new AFS cells are not as completely useful as their embryonic counterparts, but are far more useful than adult stem cells, making them a nice alternative to pissing off pro-life government types for a lot of research. I'm afraid some research (and likely all research intended to create products for human consumption,) will eventually need at least cursory testing with embryonic stem cells, but we can hopefully make the need as small as possible. If all these do is partly diffuse the political situation surrounding this research, it's still an enormous step.

I can't find anything to say that wouldn't at least move this toward a P&C state.

Stem cell research - Good for mankind
Religious interference with science - Bad for mankind

Marsman wrote:

Stem cell research - Good for mankind
Religious interference with science - Bad for mankind

Looks like at least two controversies there, both ripe with politics.

Marsman wrote:

Stem cell research - Good for mankind
Religious interference with science - Bad for mankind

There you go, wordsmythe, ol' Marsie did it for you!

A good find. Of course, Adult Stem Cells have been found to be pluripotent since at least 2003. And Mars, I would say that ethical boundaries on science are not bad for mankind.

I hope this can stay non-P&C.

It's like getting on the train to Cleveland and saying, "I hope this train doesn't go to Cleveland!"

Elysium wrote:
I hope this can stay non-P&C.

It's like getting on the train to Cleveland and saying, "I hope this train doesn't go to Cleveland!"

Moderator humor is the best kind of humor. Oh, how I laughed!

We could always derail it before it gets that far, maybe?

Marsman wrote:

Stem cell research - Good for mankind
Religious interference with science - Bad for mankind

I'm concerned when I read this post. My concern stems (get it?) from the thought that this may be a serious post. Therefore, I will assume heavy sarcasm, and possibly a sardonic grin.

JohnnyMoJo wrote:

And Mars, I would say that ethical boundaries on science are not bad for mankind.

Ah yes. Ethical boundaries. But who decides the extent of the ethics? An extremely conservative religious viewpoint, which I don't agree with, is being used to limit the usefulness of promising scientific research.

Hmmm. I need to chill.

wordsmythe wrote:

We could always derail it before it gets that far, maybe?

What have you got against Cleveland?

Rat Boy wrote:

What have you got against Cleveland?

This could be the basis of an entire thread, BY ITSELF.

Cleveland is a hole with a 3rd-rate baseball team and a 4th-rate football team.

I liked Canton and Akron, though. Nice people. I may have drank too much in Cuyahoga Falls.

An extremely conservative religious viewpoint, which I don't agree with, is being used to limit the usefulness of promising scientific research.

Would you care to explain the benefits that embryonic stem cells have over adult stem cells?

Elysium has given me the first genuine LOL of 2007!

JohnnyMoJo wrote:

A good find. Of course, Adult Stem Cells have been found to be pluripotent since at least 2003.

Of course. If they weren't pluripotent, they wouldn't be stem cells, at all. But despite being the much ballyhooed replacement for embryonic stem cells for research purposes, adult stem cells are simply nowhere NEAR as versatile as embryonic stem cells. They're certainly useful, but again, nowhere NEAR as useful as the embryonic form. Given their function, you really wouldn't expect them to be. This is an important discovery because it's no more ethically questionable than the harvesting of adult stem cells, but much closer to the functional capacity of embryonic stem cells.

As I said, even these AFS cells are a bit off, but they're close enough to be at the very least a giant step in the positive direction.

[edit] - In response to your question to Mars: Put simply, an adult stem cell has far fewer possible outcomes than an embryonic stem cell. An embryonic stem cell can become literally any tissue in the organism, where an adult stem cell is more developed, and thus more defined its eventual purpose.

Why do I always want to spell embryonic with an "i" instead of a "y"? God onli knows.

Of course. If they weren't pluripotent, they wouldn't be stem cells, at all. But despite being the much ballyhooed replacement for embryonic stem cells for research purposes, adult stem cells are simply nowhere NEAR as versatile as embrionic stem cells. They're certainly useful, but again, nowhere NEAR as useful as the embryonic form.

Just to make sure we are clear on the vernacular. Adult stem cells were originally thought to only be able to grow into the same type of tissue as their source, i.e. a liver stem cell could only become liver tissue. The original appeal of embryonic stem cells was that they were pluripotent, i.e. they could grow into any type of tissue. Some types of adult stem cells (notably umbilical cord and bone marrow) were subsequently found to be pluripotent as well.

That being said, what are the benefits of embryonic stem cells over adult stem cells?

Not to sound as though I'm repeating myself, but just to be clear: There are certainly pluripotent adult stem cells. But they are not completely pluripotent, in the way that the embryonic cells are. It's an important distinction not just because it's a jack-of-all trades cell that allows you to (theoretically,) grow whatever you want without having to keep a number of different types of cells on hand, but also because for the purposes of pure research, they allow a far more comprehensive look at the development of the organism as a whole.

In the kind of system where ethics questions were more commonly seen as raising the overall "price" of an action (due to the potential costs of loss of good will, etc.), these new cells would be a wonderful bargain. Hopefully sciencey-types will be all about using these.

In the interests of stymieing Elysium and keeping this out of P&C, I will suggest that you might want to look at some of the latest research on ASC's pluripotency. And note that ASCs have none of the drawbacks of ESCs (such as causing tumors).

I will instead comment on how fair and balanced the coverage was in the original San Francisco Chronicle story. It was well presented and covered the salient points of both sides. I wish all coverage of the issue was similarly unbiased.

JohnnyMoJo wrote:

I will instead comment on how fair and balanced the coverage was in the original San Francisco Chronicle story. It was well presented and covered the salient points of both sides. I wish all coverage of the issue was similarly unbiased.

Quick, someone check the ambient temperature in Hell.

Credit where credit is due...

I'm not sure exactly which latest research you're referring to, though that is a bit of a power move, to just suggest someone else read up on nonspecific research.

As far as I know, (and this info is less than six months old, so far as I can tell,) there was a brief period of time where adult stem cells were thought to indirectly have full plasticity. This was thought to be the case because of a few experiment which injected bone-marrow stem cells (hematopoietic stem cells,) into injured rats, and saw these cells apparently mutate to repair a myriad of different problems.

This research, which is so far as I know the only real evidence that adult stem cells can be fully plastic, has been disproven both by way of alternative explanation (the HSC's injected were unknowingly laced with the ultra-rare MAPC's, which were the actual healers,) and by continued failure to replicate the results.

Again, nobody's arguing that adult stem cells are useless - far from it. But to argue that they are functionally identical to embryonic stem cells is to misunderstand just what the difference between the two is. If adult stem cells were fully plastic, as you're claiming, it would go against one of the very most basic tenants of cell biology: That cellular development is overwhelmingly in one direction, and progressively restrictive. Given that an adult stem cell is a more developed version of the embryonic stem cell, its full plasticity would be an unbelievable revolution in cell biology. That of course doesn't make it impossible, but it does make it highly unlikely - especially given all the negative examples that have come up since.

That's why this discovery is so important.

Rat Boy wrote:

What have you got against Cleveland?

He's no Quagmire. Giggidy.

As someone who holds the "extremely conservative religious viewpoint" held in such derision above who still is interested in seeing scientific advances, I'm very pleased by this news.

dhelor wrote:
Rat Boy wrote:

What have you got against Cleveland?

He's no Quagmire. Giggidy.

"Your face here! Call 555-0134."

Jadawin wrote:

As someone who holds the "extremely conservative religious viewpoint" held in such derision above who still is interested in seeing scientific advances, I'm very pleased by this news.

Part of the problem with that assessment is that even the scientists won't claim that the stem cells extracted from amniotic fluid is superior to embryonic stem cells. This article seems to be the only one tempering the conservative parade. About the only thing you can claim that amniotic fluid can prevent and cure is Barclay's Protomorphosis Syndrome.

Rat Boy wrote:

About the only thing you can claim that amniotic fluid can prevent and cure is Barclay's Protomorphosis Syndrome.

That's really important, though. Remember how ugly Troi got? No Troi means I would have paid a lot less attention to TNG as a kid.

wordsmythe wrote:

That's really important, though. Remember how ugly Troi got? No Troi means I would have paid a lot less attention to TNG as a kid.

I'd still hit Frog Troi even if Bug Worf had dibs on her already. Ape Nurse Ogawa, though, not so much.

Klackon Worf would have slapped you silly, and then eaten your head.

I'd just like to point out that we managed to keep it civil. To me, P&C isn't for political and controversial topics, it's for topics, it's for topics that people think might spawn a debate that goes south of civil. This one didn't go there.

So.

Dear Elysium,

Nyah.

Love, Morro.

it's for topics that people think might spawn a debate that goes south of civil. This one didn't go there.

My God says you're going to hell, Morro.

Burn.

wheee!