"Miraculous" Stem Cell Progress Reported In China 429
destinyland writes "In China's Guangdong Province there's been 'almost miraculous' progress in actually using stem cells to treat diseases such as brain injury, cerebral palsy, ataxia and other optic nerve damage, lower limb ischemia, autism, spinal muscular atrophy, and multiple sclerosis. One Chinese biotech company, Beike, is now building a 21,500 square foot stem cell storage facility and hiring professors from American universities such as Stanford. Two California families even flew their children to China for a cerebral palsy treatment that isn't available in the US. The founder of Beike is so enthusiastic, he says his company is exploring the concept of using stem cells to extend longevity beyond 120 years."
Re:Watch out for chinese stem cells (Score:3, Interesting)
They have lead in them...
<Ray Kurzweil>
Oh well, it'll just be a few more years before they develop stem cells to adjust the effects of lead on the human body. Singularity [wikipedia.org], here we come!
</Ray Kurzweil>
Re:Watch out for chinese stem cells (Score:5, Interesting)
Say what you will about the Chinese, but we could still learn a thing or two from them. At least they have the guts to try this stuff.
Chinese Sputnik? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Sounds Like Cold Fusion (Score:5, Interesting)
Finding fraud in China [nature.com]: As Chinese research expands, who is looking out for faked results?
I don't want to come off as more racist than I already do or anything, but the last few miraculous discoveries in China were faked.
Re:Watch out for chinese stem cells (Score:2, Interesting)
Thank you....that was the first thing I was thinking...that if the results of their testing doesn't match the desired outcome, how long until they start fudging the results. China's Government isn't known for being the most open and tolerant of differing opinions.
Re:Sounds Like Cold Fusion (Score:5, Interesting)
You're not coming off as racist. That's a cultural observation, and it's entirely appropriate.
Re:Embyonic vs. Adult. (Score:5, Interesting)
I am not an expert on this in any way. However I would expect Adult Stem Cells from the same patient would make more compatible fixes vs. Embryonic cells from a different genetic group.
If I were to regrow a bone for my finger with Stem Cells I would expect mine to more closely match the one I loss, and would be accepted by my body better.
If there is genuine life extension... (Score:5, Interesting)
I guess it's going to be a true test of ideals as Republican conservatives move to block stem cell research ... as they approach age 75.
This is why there will probably be genuine life extension, because the elderly and soon-to-be elderly in our society control so many resources.
Once there is an upsurge in life extension, this should be followed by an upsurge in curing cancer. Why? Because if you extend the lifespan of a mammal long enough, it's going to die of cancer.
http://www.sens.org/ [sens.org]
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/aubrey_de_grey_says_we_can_avoid_aging.html [ted.com]
Dumb Question... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Chinese Sputnik? (Score:4, Interesting)
Oh, give me a break. People always say, "Things were different in [some time in the past] and now they're changing for the worst."
The more things change, the more they stay the same. Yes, we have our distractions today - typically in the form of computers and technology, but these things existed ten, twenty, and a hundred years ago, too. People's basic needs have not changed - food, shelter, needing to feel important, love, etc.
Interestingly enough, though, the reason it may seem like people are wasting more time is because they are (I know, I'm sort of contradicting myself). We are able to accomplish things much more quickly that we do have more time for important things as well as things like Twitter and Facebook. It really depends on how people choose to use their time.
As for the GP post, I, too, am concerned what the US is going to do in the future. There are a lot of very smart people in other countries, and the United States cannot rest on its laurels. It'll be interesting to see what the future brings.
Re:The U.S. lost ground by not doing what? (Score:2, Interesting)
The environment towards biology research having anything to do with stem cells has gotten very hostile over the last 6 years. I do part time work in a biomed engineering lab at my university (UVA), and between many of the higher-up administrators not knowing the difference between embryonic stem cells and adult stem cells and many organizations (PETA and co.) protesting any publication of clinical models involving animal research, it's difficult to get anything really innovative approved. It's gotten to the point where the lab doesn't even mention ADASC research to visitors/people on lab tours/on the "about us" section of the university website.
Asking: what did Bush do to adult stem cell research is akin to asking "what did Chernobyl" due to nuclear power plant construction in the US? Not much directly, but quite a bit indirectly. What does the USA have researchwise that China doesn't have? Tons of venture capital, cutting edge equipment all over the place, and a huge array of academic experts. However, the article points out that the state funds promising start ups, they have no trouble getting new material/equipment, and are doing a bit of a brain drain on western academics. China has less regulation on research, fewer watchdog organizations, literal armies of unemployed grad students, and a funding structure that couldn't care less what the public's moral reaction is.
How is it surprising that all things equal, less regulations = faster early development?
Re:A Dying Breed (Score:5, Interesting)
The fist treatment that actually uses embryonic SC is scheduled later this year.
I really wish people would stop acting like we are so far behind because of Bush he only stopped research on embryonic not adult.
Re:Conservatives are always dying (Score:1, Interesting)
Even that is a bit hazy, at least if you are talking about when a unique individual "human" life begins. At conception, you have a single cell. If that contains a single human life, what happens during the formation of fraternal twins (where that cell splits apart)? Does that unique human life now span two entities, or does it go to only one entity and the other one gets a new human life? Of course, this is probably assuming the existence of a "soul".
It's adult stem cells (Score:1, Interesting)
Of course the first /. commenter comes in ranting about conservatives who have blocked embryonic stem cell research. For years, though, many of those conservatives have also been attempting to point out the untapped benefits of noncontroversial adult stem cells.
In TFA you'll find Dr. Hu noting that "after three years of clinical studies observing more than 100 cases, I decided to build a company to supply and work on safe adult stem cells." It also mentions that "Japan's Dr. Shinya Yamanaka demonstrated the ability to reprogram adult cells to behave as embryonic stem cells as early as 2007."
If the US indeed missed the boat, it's because some were blindly driven to free themselves from what they saw as outdated moralism while ignoring the broad possibilities of adult stem cell research.
Re:Sounds Like Cold Fusion (Score:2, Interesting)
Is it more noble to get the fuck out, or stay and help fix what's wrong with your country? (ObDisclaimer: I have my own plans to desert the USA. Sorry.)
Re:Isn't that exactly... (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm pretty sure the poster mean when the experimental results are replicated independently by another lab.
Also, stem cells replicate relatively infrequently. Replication results in minor DNA damage, so the body keeps the source of new cells in as pristine a condition as possible by minimizing stem cell replication. One of the two new cells chills out until needed again while the other replicates as many time as is necessary.
That's actually one of the major concerns for adult stem cells. Taking cells from an adult, which has already endured a lifetime of genetic damage, and using them for a stem cell line is begging for some cancers to pop up. All the nastiest cancers known to man originate from stem cells. Fetal stem cells have the benefit of being the most pristine stem cells you can get.
Re:Watch out for chinese stem cells (Score:2, Interesting)
It takes more balls to have the ability to do something, yet hold back due to ethics/morals.
Re:A Dying Breed (Score:5, Interesting)
It's destruction of embryos.
While technically true, the term "embryo" can be misleading: it could lead some to think that the thing being destroyed is something close to a fetus---i.e., something with a central nervous system and a beating heart. But typically, "Embryonic stem cell research" only involves the destruction of a blastocyst [wikipedia.org]. We're talking about a tiny cluster of cells that has *no neurons*. (If left to grow into a late-stage embryo then some of the cells in a blastocyst will have been the *distant ancestors* of the first neurons.)
And the anti-ESCR crowd objects to said destruction because...well it's not clear. I gather that some of them think a "soul" is injected into a zygote at the moment of its formation. (Of course, the meaning of that sentence hinges on what you think a "soul" is, and I rarely get a satisfactory definition out of religious types.)
But if there is such a thing as a human soul---loosely defined here as the mind of a person---then findings in neuroscience seem to suggest that a human soul is something generated by a human brain. In that case a common housefly would have greater capacity to bear a soul than a blastocyst, because at least a housefly has a brain!
So while I recognize that the anti-ESCR crowd has some deep emotional feelings about this, I also feel that the respect paid to them by policy-makers was not earned legitimately. How could it have been? The foundation of their argument is superstition.
Re:A Dying Breed (Score:3, Interesting)