Finnish Patient Gets New Jaw from His Own Stem Cells 141
An anonymous reader writes with news out of Finland, where a patient's upper jaw was replaced with bone cultivated from stem cells and grown inside the patient himself. We discussed other advances in stem cell research a few months ago. Quoting:
"In this case they identified and pulled out cells called mesenchymal stem cells -- immature cells than can give rise to bone, muscle or blood vessels. When they had enough cells to work with, they attached them to a scaffold made out of a calcium phosphate biomaterial and then put it inside the patient's abdomen to grow for nine months. The cells turned into a variety of tissues and even produced blood vessels, the researchers said."
Re:Wow, they didn't even kill an unborn baby (Score:2, Insightful)
Cut it out. Please, just stop it.
Re:It'll take off when cosmetic replacement is her (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How much did it cost? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Wow, they didn't even kill an unborn baby (Score:2, Insightful)
You sound like a hypocrite.
Re:How much did it cost? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Wow, they didn't even kill an unborn baby (Score:5, Insightful)
I have nothing against working multiple lines of research: one or both will pay off handsomely (or maybe another effort that's not even been thought of yet, but will likely benefit from current progress.) But the "killing babies" argument is getting old and tired, and is not relevant because nobody kills babies for the express purpose of acquiring stem cells. That's just a lie, pure and simple. They're discarded embryos that have no hope of ever being born
Nobody wants to deal with the real issue of why there are so many non-viable embryos available for research purposes in the first place. What? That's a complex psycho-socio-economic problem that has no easy answer and can't be solved by blowing up abortion clinics or passing a few laws? Huh. How about that for controversy. Perhaps we need to rethink some basic aspects of our culture and figure out where we went wrong. This so-called "controversy" over stem cell research is a symptom of some deeper issues. Issues that, I might add, aren't going to disappear just because our President doesn't understand that his moral sense is too simplistic to provide effective guidance in this area (among others.)
I get just as torqued off when people make similar irrational commentary on other equally-hot topics. So calling me a hypocrite is a bit off: I just want people to learn to think. Only then does a reasoned response that might actually improve matters become possible. Otherwise everyone is just stroking their egos and refusing to learn anything.
Look, this same technique is applied to many different issues. Take illegal immigration. As soon as anyone brings up the idea of enforcing the law as written, some asshole immediately starts crying "racism! racism!". At that point, any rational discussion becomes impossible, because anyone who believes we should enforce our own laws has now been labeled a bigot. Doesn't matter what the facts are any longer.
So, if you want to have a decent dialog about the use of discarded embryos in stem cell research, keep the "killing babies" commentary to yourself. It serves little purpose other than to polarize the participants and eliminate any possibility of rational discourse. The people who are performing this research (the ones who originally used embryonic cells) are not baby killers, not abortion doctors, they're researchers with a genuine desire to advance our scientific knowledge and help people. Such deliberate and malicious mischaracterization of others generally means that someone has a fatally flawed perspective that cannot be supported by reality
Bad tag (Score:4, Insightful)
Stop overusing that tag! </rant>
Re:It'll take off when cosmetic replacement is her (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:And in other news (Score:1, Insightful)
The pope just shit a brick
Why? Didn't you know that the pope endorses stem cell research? [catholicnews.com]
Re:So Tell Me (Score:1, Insightful)
I'm sure researchers in the US are looking into similar techniques since so far adult stem cell research has shown real theraputic results whereas fetal stem cell research has not.
Re:Wow, they didn't even kill an unborn baby (Score:2, Insightful)
Before you cast my comment aside, let me say that in many respects I agree with you.
Crying "killing babies" is a mantra created for influencing the masses. I realize that there is a huge gray area as far as abortion goes. Sometimes it is necessitated because the mothers life is in danger, other times the fetus is dead.
Killing the fetus for the simple expedient of harvesting stem-cells makes me uncomfortable, and I would vote against it if ever given the chance. Using unborn (through natural death - rejection in the womb for instance) fetuses for that purpose makes me less uncomfortable.
I am however all for exploring means that would make it unnecessary to use a fetus for the purpose of harvesting stem-cells, but making blanket uninformed decisions is wrong and trying to get the masses involved by preying on their fears is wrong.
Re:Wow, they didn't even kill an unborn baby (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, as a parallel example, some states still have anti-sodomy laws on the record. If you were to recommend "enforcing those laws as written," don't you think people would be right to decry you as anti-gay?
The laws already on the record aren't automatically morally neutral. They may very well be racist laws. You certainly don't have to try too hard to find laws that WERE explicitly racist in our nation's recent history. If you're going to argue in favor of current immigration policy, you're going to have to come up with a better argument for why the current laws are acceptable than merely that they're the current laws.
Re:Wow, they didn't even kill an unborn baby (Score:3, Insightful)
Obviously, as someone who doesn't believe in a human soul I'm at best only peripherally concerned with that aspect of the abortion controversy, however I do believe that a society such as ours should maintain some self-respect, some respect for each other. The problem is complex, however, and simply outlawing abortion without honestly and openly discussing the underlying cultural and economic concerns that affect abortion rates is pointless. Failure to address those issues will only make matters worse.
Regardless, I agree with you that abortion won't be dealt with in a responsible way unless we stop with the fear-mongering and irrational arguments. That applies to a whole host of other problems that are facing our society right now, from foreign policy to illicit drugs to stem-cell research. Unfortunately, many, many people simply cannot see past their own worldview, won't compromise under any conditions, refuse to accept that the other guy might have a point. Other people are just ignorant and believe whatever they're told by the latest talking head. As a consequence, sometimes very little progress gets made.
And that's too bad.
Re:It'll take off when cosmetic replacement is her (Score:3, Insightful)
Sidenote? You have got to be fucking kidding me.
I've been drinking fluoride-water and using fluoride-toothpaste my entire life, and I have never had a single cavity. I'm not implying that my anecdote is any less meaningless than yours, but mine doesn't come with any sidenotes that are more significant than the "main" point!
Re:Wow, they didn't even kill an unborn baby (Score:3, Insightful)
(Really, what do you think would happen to most of the embryos being used for stem cell research? At least they're going to something useful.)
Re:How much did it cost? (Score:1, Insightful)