Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Biotech Science

New Treatment Helps Cure Spinal Injuries 193

wap writes "Researchers have found that an injection of polyethylene glycol (PEG) into the site of neural injury was very effective in saving neurons in dogs, allowing them to recover their movement after the injury. This is an amazing development. PEG is a simple, safe chemical. Using it as a post-injury treatment could prevent paralysis in thousands of accident victims every year, if hospitals start using it. This doesn't mean we don't need stem cell research, but it is a simple and potentially cheap way to get many of the benefits for spinal injury."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Treatment Helps Cure Spinal Injuries

Comments Filter:
  • Safe? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by xanthines-R-yummy ( 635710 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @12:32AM (#10999758) Homepage Journal
    I wasn't aware that PEG was safe. Don't you use that stuff punch holes in cellular membranes? Like when making hybridomas (antibody-producing cells used in research).
    • Re:Safe? (Score:4, Informative)

      by xanthines-R-yummy ( 635710 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @12:35AM (#10999778) Homepage Journal
      For those that want a link. [ouhsc.edu]
      • Re:Safe? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Muhammar ( 659468 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @12:50AM (#10999854)
        PEG linker is attached to some injectable drugs to modify (prolong and delay) onset of their effect. PEG is also part of some IV formulations. I don't remember that safety of PEG would ever be a big concern. Besides, these patients with spinal injury have to take only one or few doses, it is not like they would be on it for lifetime.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      LOL.....everyone thought vioxx was safe and look what they are now ......

      • Re:Safe? (Score:2, Insightful)

        by iocat ( 572367 )
        Yeah, so I'd rather take the chance of long-term damage and be able to walk, versus being super safe and in a wheelchair...
      • Re:Safe? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Psychofreak ( 17440 )
        I'll take a temporary increased risk of a severe heart attack to sure death or paralysis. That may be just me, but I also plan to never have more nerve damage done than I already have. Not having full feeling in a few fingertips because of a drift-fence post is unpleasent, but tolerable (sliced through 2 fingers to the bone). Not having any ability to move on my own would be a fate worse than death I think.
        Phil
    • Re:Safe? (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I wasn't aware that PEG was safe.

      It isn't! I knew this one guy who had a hot girlfriend. And she was really into pegging. My buddy was squimish about it, of course, but she was treatening to dump him and find someone who'd let her do it. Anyhow, she just rode him silly. He was so torn up that he had to go to the Emergency Room that night and tell them what happened! Man, talk about embarrasing! I would never let my girlfriend ... what? Oh. I thought we were talking about something else. Nevermi

    • Re:Safe? (Score:2, Informative)

      by chemicalsno ( 751266 )
      If you google it it comes up with numerous references to it being used in cosmetics and cleansers, is make-up hazardous? It's probably safe
      • Just because something is used in a safe product doesn't mean that, used alone, it will be safe. For example, salt is composed of two chemicals, chlorine and sodium. Chlorine is deadly to humans. Salt is not.
        • Re:Safe? (Score:3, Informative)

          by torstenvl ( 769732 )
          That is false.

          First of all -- tangentially -- 'salt' is not chlorine and sodium. There are many different types of salt, including CaCl2 (used often on sidewalks and roads because it dissolves to three ions as opposed to the two of NaCl which lowers the freezing point even more, thus being more effective in de-icing).

          Secondly, NaCl (standard table salt in the United States) is not composed of two 'chemicals'. Its molecular composition is that of two elements. I realize the distinction is minor but you are
          • Well, if had to make a database or class diagram, then, "chemicals" would include "atoms". Maybe I should just shut up, because you are right in all other respects about chemicals.

            However, if a chemical is safe to use on the skin, it still can be harmful inside the body. Example: air. So I believe when I hear it said PEG is not safe (inside the body).
            • Hmm. Well your right, my reasoning is flawed there. I guess I was working on the unspoken assumption that dangerous substances (to ingest) aren't put in cosmetics on the danger of there being children who might ingest them. And direct insertion into the blood stream could have other complications. Still though, I don't think that they would have injected it unless they knew what was going on (better than we do anyway). It sounds like a great discovery, and if it's handled safely and responsibly, it could be
    • Re:Safe? (Score:5, Informative)

      by obiwanjabroni ( 619615 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @12:43AM (#10999817)
      PEG is already used in a number of treatments as "PEGylation". PEGylation, or the addition of the polyethylene glycol group, to interferons are already being tried as therapy for Hepatitis C. The advantage lies in the ability of the pegylated compound to resist excretion in the kidneys and to increase solubility.
    • Re:Safe? (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Is that the same stuff that is in Dr. Pepper.
      • Re:Safe? (Score:2, Funny)

        by Psychofreak ( 17440 )
        Maybe, but I think you are thinking of propolyne glycol. It is an alternative to Ethylene Glycol as an antifreese agent.
    • Re:Safe? (Score:3, Informative)

      by Synbiosis ( 726818 )
      PEG is used to alter a solutions viscosity in lab. By itself it has no detrimental effect on cells I'm aware of, which is why it's used for that purpose.
    • Re:Safe? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Idarubicin ( 579475 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @04:09AM (#11000383) Journal
      I wasn't aware that PEG was safe. Don't you use that stuff punch holes in cellular membranes? Like when making hybridomas (antibody-producing cells used in research).

      As they say, the dose makes the poison. Apparently they've got a working concentration of PEG that can be IV injected that is sufficiently low to not harm healthy tissues--the effect is confined to the location of spinal trauma.

      Actually, I'd strongly recommend looking at the linked article. As with making hybridomas, the scientists here are deliberately fusing cells together. In this case, the idea is that even if a cell is fatally damaged, fusing it to an adjacent healthy nerve cell can allow it to survive.

      Apparently, the PEG also mucks with signalling so that the death of a few cells doesn't lead to apoptosis (cell death) in nearby structures. That's a great bonus. Altogether a very neat result. I'm kind of surprised that this works, actually--I would have expected a lot of fusions between axons and Schwann cells, or something equally useless...very interesting.

    • PEG is used to facilitate the uptake of DNA into eubacterial cells among other things. I wonder what this will do for transposing pathogenic bacteria with random DNA from patients. Sounds dodgy to me.
  • Wonder if it act like a support for the cels to regrow on. Darn intersting!
    • by mikael ( 484 )
      They can actually do that already. I was watching "Impact" tonight, and there was this story of a teenage girl who was in a car-crash, in which an accident cut all the nerves in her upper arm. The only solution was for the doctors to use nerve tissue grafts from a dead donor. This didn't give her immediate nerve cell regeneration, but it did provide a support for the existing nerves to regrow. Eventually, she regained most of the control of her hand.
  • Yes, but... (Score:5, Funny)

    by k4_pacific ( 736911 ) <`moc.oohay' `ta' `cificap_4k'> on Sunday December 05, 2004 @12:37AM (#10999781) Homepage Journal
    Yes, but, does it work if you are paralyzed from the neck up?
    • the conservation right is very interested. This condition has reached pandemic proportions among their ranks. Maybe this treatment can avoid the ethical delemia that has left so many right wingers untreated.
      • That would be interesting if there were any promising fetal stem cell treatments. But there are not. The most promising stem cell research is on multipotent stem cells from adults or umbilical cords.
        • >any promising fetal stem cell treatments. But there are not.

          The popular media isn't exactly a scientific journal. Don't make absolute statements, unless you're willing to back them up.

          The following are written above the soundbite 5th grade level:

          search1 [google.com]

          Or just type "embryonic stem cells" here [nih.gov] and be ready for some surprises.
    • Bummer... (Score:1, Troll)

      by WIAKywbfatw ( 307557 )
      This, the recent stem cell/paralysis breakthrough, living to 1,000 all coming a few weeks after Christopher Reeves dies? Wow, talk about quitting playing just before your lottery numbers come up.

      If I didn't know better, I'd say that these guys were all lining up to announce the moment he died. Either that or that whole "curse of Superman" shit is more powerful than anyone first thought. Quick, let's all take out life insurance policies on Brandon Routh [yahoo.com].
    • by Anonymous Coward
      Only if you're over 65 and you live in Korea...

    • Could someone *please* inject Bush's brain, or at least the brains of the international observers of the elections (assuming they're not "enemy combatants" in jail without trial already)?

      I sense a great need.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    This doesn't mean we don't need stem cell research, but it is a simple and potentially cheap way to get many of the benefits for spinal injury.

    Christ, why does everyone feel the need to stick in their two cents about some marginally-related issue? Must everyone try to link every article they submit to some kind of larger issue? I'm starting to think Jon Katz is submitting all these articles under pseudonyms.

    ...The new treatment holds great promise for those suffering from spinal injuries. Interesting

    • actually, you should have started to take offense at the mention of sallying forth on the basis of this research on dogs and injecting thousands of humans in hospitals.
    • I'm starting to think Jon Katz is submitting all these articles under pseudonyms.

      No, its just michael. This is normal for him.
    • the mother of Eric Harris ... was engaged to be married to Mr. Jeffery Jackson until he fell victim to a spinal accident. She broke off the engagement ...

      No surprise that Eric ended up a killer. His mother dumped "her love" probably within milliseconds after he met a misfortune...

    • Uh, what? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mcc ( 14761 ) <amcclure@purdue.edu> on Sunday December 05, 2004 @01:23AM (#10999974) Homepage
      There isn't really a "larger issue" here; spinal injuries are one of the most immediately promising applications of stem cell research, and there was an article just like a week or something ago here about curing certain spinal injuries in rats by injecting cordal stem cells.

      Since stem cells are currently in the news as a directly competing potential technique for doing the exact same thing the technique in this article does, it seems mentioning them here is both reasonable and germane. If nothing else I think that saying that new experimental spinal cord research techniques are only "marginally related" to new experimental spinal cord research techniques is perhaps not quite fair.
    • I'm starting to think Jon Katz is submitting all these articles under pseudonyms.

      No I'm not! i mean.. um... polyethylene glycol is l33t, yo, and has no crucial meaning to further investigate the nuances of the reticulation of ruthless mass murdering killers.
  • by HotNeedleOfInquiry ( 598897 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @12:37AM (#10999784)
    That an injection of DMSO would halt swelling and stop nerve and brain damage in trama injuries.

    As far as I know, nothing came of it, alledgedly because nobody wanted to do clinical trials since it couldn't be patented.

    History repeating itself?
    • Bingo (Score:5, Insightful)

      by TheBurrito ( 767042 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @12:57AM (#10999878)
      I worked in the spinal inury repair field for a number of years, and I think you've hit the nail right on the head. At least one of the nails.

      A while ago, literally about a dozen papers would come out each month professing some miraculous breakthrough in the field. Usually all pretty well done, almost always in big peer-review journals. Very few of these methods have been followed through to clinical trials. The skeptic in me says it's because, as you said, there wasn't always a clear way to profit from it.

      My even-more-skeptical side says that a lot of these results get fudged quite a bit because, thanks to recent attention paid to Christopher Reeve/stem cells et al, there's a lot of money floating around and many opportunities for researchers to make a name for themselves. That's why they never pan out -- they don't work.

      This isn't to discredit anyone working in academic sciences, almost all of whom are grossly overworked and underpaid. However, the trend in NSF funding in the last five years has been to limit the number of researchers receiving grants, and dole out much larger grants to those few promising studies. It creates very cutthroat competition, forces researchers to overhype their studies, and ultimately causes a lot of scientific dead ends. Worst of all, it gives a lot of false hope to people suffering from a number of injuries/diseases that a cure is just around the corner (as long as you write your congressman to give us more money).

      It's really quite sick, and was one of the reasons why I left the field.

    • by nido ( 102070 ) <nido56NO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Sunday December 05, 2004 @01:04AM (#10999907) Homepage
      DMSO is wonderful stuff. I once took a divot out of my forehead (stood up into the corner of a cabinet door). I could feel the blood starting to pool up, so I went to look in a mirror. "Yeah, that's going to scar up nicely..." Fortunately I'd heard that DMSO can prevent scars from forming, so I poured some onto a cotton pad and put it on my forehead. It burned a little bit, but it slowed the bleeding down by 90%. Nice. If I look real close I can see a tiny scar. It could've been much worse.

      DMSO takes stuff right through the skin. You can dissolve asprin in dmso and apply it topically, and that asprin will go right to where you need it. I did that for a while, but stopped when I realized I couldn't tell the difference between DMSO+Asprin and straight DMSO.
      It was also shown to relieve pain and swelling, relax muscles, relieve arthritis, improve blood supply and slow the growth of bacteria. It relieves the pain of sprains and even of broken bones. It enhances the effectiveness of other pharmacological agents. If you apply DMSO to a bruise, the bruise dissolves and disappears in a matter of minutes! If you apply it to the jaw after wisdom tooth removal, all pain and swelling is prevented! The pain of acute gout can be handled with the application of 5 cc of seventy percent DMSO in water four times each day. Application to a fever blister results in rapid resolution of this problem. DMSO also relieves the pain of minor burns and if applied soon after the burn happens, will decrease the tissue damage suffered. DMSO speeds all healing, approximately doubling or tripling all healing responses.

      - http://www.medical-library.net/sites/_dmso_dimethy lsulfoxide.html
      I love DMSO, and in fact am about to break out a new bottle, 'cause I've spent too much time on this stupid laptop computer, and my shoulders and forearms are all inflammed. Bathe/dry off/apply/wait 10 minutes/rinse.

      Everyone who's considering using DMSO thing should get a book on the topic, 'cause it's possible to do some stupid stuff. I know a guy who soaked a cotton pad in DMSO and put it on his foot with an ace bandage. His nerves were firing painfully for days... :).
      • by Anonymous Coward

        Everyone who's considering using DMSO thing should get a book on the topic, 'cause it's possible to do some stupid stuff. I know a guy who soaked a cotton pad in DMSO and put it on his foot with an ace bandage. His nerves were firing painfully for days... :).

        True enough. DMSO was originally used as an engine degreaser. It's a pretty powerful chemical solvent. Now, a lot of people are rubbing it all over themselves because they saw Dr. Weil chuckling on TV about how it's some kind of miracle cure. Rea

      • by DoubleReed ( 565061 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @01:46AM (#11000051)
        A bit of googling turned up the following:

        DMSO
        William T. Jarvis, Ph.D.

        DMSO (dimethyl sulfoxide) is derived from lignin, the binding substance of trees. The Crown Zellerbach Corporation, a mammoth lumber company, holds a number of patents on DMSO for use as an industrial solvent or liniment for treating pain in horses. Crown Zellerbach licenses DMSO exclusively to Research Industries of Salt Lake City for marketing as a drug called Rimso-50. Topically-applied DMSO has the unusual ability to act as a "chemical hypodermic needle" which is to say that it is rapidly absorbed through the skin and can take with it other substances that ordinarily would not cross the skin's barrier. Topically-applied DMSO produces a garlic-like taste in the mouth and a breath odor. Topical use can cause a rash, blistering, itching, hives, and skin thickening. Intravenous use can cause kidney damage and other adverse side effects.

        DMSO was approved by the FDA in 1978 for only one purpose, the treatment of a rare bladder disorder, interstitial cystitis. However, scandal surrounded the FDA's approval of DMSO and some still believe that a cloud hangs over it. Stanley Jacob, MD, served as an supposedly unbiased medical monitor of DMSO between 1974 and 1979, but for three of those years (1974, 1978, and 1979), he was on the Research Industries board of directors. In addition to getting consulting and director's fees, Jacob is said to have bought 50,000 shares of the company's stocks. The medical officer charged with reviewing data from clinical trials of DMSO, K.C. Pani, accepted $36,500 in gratuities from Dr. Jacob during the time. A detailed account of the dubious FDA approval of DMSO is provided by Howard Rosenberg in "The DMSO Affair." [1 ]

        DMSO became a darling among the promoters of quackery after CBS-TV's 60 Minutes portrayed the substance as a medical breakthrough [2]. Some arthritis sufferers testified that DMSO had provided relief. The Arthritis Foundation says that DMSO can act as a liniment with a counter-irritating effect temporarily relieving pain, but it does not reduce inflammation as do truly effective arthritis remedies (Arthritis Foundation, undated). A detailed Public Information Memo was issued to the Chapter Executive Directors of the Arthritis Foundation on November 13, 1981, following the publication of a popular trade book.

        Mildred Miller, owner/administrator of the Degenerative Disease Medical Center in Las Vegas, Nevada, promoted DMSO for a variety of disorders including arthritis, mental illness, emphysema, and cancer. Miller wrote a book touting DMSO entitled A Little Dab Will Do Ya! (Quality Advertising, 1981). Miller also published Preventive Health News, a tabloid-sized newsletter in which she promoted DMSO and carried on a harangue against the establishment (Miller published another book with the disrespectful title Up Yours FDA). Miller was eventually convicted of Medicare fraud and went to prison [2]. The American Cancer Society issued a statement advising against the use of DMSO for cancer [3].

        During its heyday, black market DMSO could be purchased in health food stores, military surplus stores, hardware stores, at swap meet booths, or even from vendors working out of the trunks of their cars parked along highways. Very often black market DMSO is industrial grade, not medical grade. A problem with industrial grade DMSO is that companies bottling the substance as an industrial solvent use the same equipment to bottle other substances. Residual toxic materials can contaminate industrial grade DMSO and may be taken into the body by DMSO's action as a "chemical hypodermic."

        Because of DMSO's dangers and legal status, the FDA has had a running battle with DMSO distributors. In 1980, the agency discussed the controversy surrounding the drug in the FDA Consumer [4]. In 1982, the agency reported on actions taken against companies distributing DMSO in the Pacific Northwest [5]. A book touting DMSO, The Persecuted Drug: The Story of DMSO, by Pat McGrady became the
      • Look at that list of supposed benefits in parent post:
        It was also shown to relieve pain and swelling, relax muscles, relieve arthritis, improve blood supply and slow the growth of bacteria. It relieves the pain of sprains and even of broken bones.

        That is completely utterly absurd. The only was you could possibly imagine that such a useful substance would NOT be in widespread use is if the medical establishment is either completely retarded or some kind of vast conspiracy.

        Most /.'ers would look down on an
      • The important question is, if you mix some of this stuff with LSD and put it in a squirtgun and go around squirting people, will they hallucinate?
      • Anyone else think this sounds like bacta (the liquid cure all) from Star Wars?
      • Quick note of caution --

        DMSO has been proven to cause cataracts in animal studies. Though this hasn't been observed in humans (yet), it's worth considering before you start swabbing yourself with random industrial solvents. It also gives you really bad garlic breath, so if you're one of the /. minority that has a spouse or significant other, you might want to stick with asprin.

    • As a veterinary technician, I can attest to DMSO's anti-inflammatory properties. We use it frequently in dogs to reduce swelling and sclerosis at injection sites in dogs undergoing chemotherapy and in dogs and horses to treat shock. While DMSO is commonly used in veterinary medicine, it is not frequently if at all labeled for such use. Most containers of DMSO explicitly say "For solvent use only." We have to warn owners that studies indicate that DMSO has anti-inflammatory properties, but we are in NO W
  • by johnpaul191 ( 240105 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @12:38AM (#10999788) Homepage
    i am sure medical grade antifreeze will cost even more than injet ink....
    kind of like how superglue can close wounds from razor sharp objects, but hostipal grade liquid bandage probably costs about $200/tube.
    • by Tyler Eaves ( 344284 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @12:44AM (#10999823)
      Well, in all fairness, there is a reason for that, to a degree. Medical stuff has to be very, very, very sanitary.
      • Superglue's far to unclean a product, Yeh right!

        How many deaths are there a year due to contaminated super-glue?

        How many people catch xyz because they cleaned a cut with toilet tissue instead of millspec glaxosmithkline tissue paper?

        I'm sorry you can used dental floss and sutures if you want, but hell it's not made by a licensed qualified professional company, so you'll just have to pay glaxo to do a bit more lobying.
        • "Superglue's far to unclean a product, Yeh right! How many deaths are there a year due to contaminated super-glue?"

          Super-glue generally isn't used on small cuts that don't require medical intervention, and if it were, the cut was nowhere near deep enough for an infecton to be much of an issue.

          In a clinical setting, however, the medical grade stuff is used on open/surgical wounds -- "cuts" that if infected could cause a person to lose a limb or their life.

          (Would you seriously want non-sterilized instrumen
    • by dAzED1 ( 33635 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @12:46AM (#10999834) Journal
      polyethylene glycol != ethylene glycol

      Don't let yourself be confused. Its not "medical grade antifreeze." That, and stuff you inject into yourself damn well should have higher standards than antifreeze for your car.

    • I think that you're thinking of propylene glycol, commonly used in de-icing/antifreeze fluids.
    • The reason the hospital grade is so expensive is often things like testing, purity, and sterilization. Something clean enough to hold in your hand is not necessarily clean enough to embed in the glued together bone or skin tissue of someone with a suppressed immune system due to illness.

      And the hospital grade costs about $20/tube, with a fancy applicator designed to put it on thinly, last I looked on a hospital bill.
  • this coupled with the earlier report that there would be "advances that would extend the age of a person to 1,000 years of age" sounds like I'll be alive for a looooooong time.
    • Yeah, but imagine how boring it would be to live to 1000. The human male's production of testosterone starts to drop at age 30. Slowing aging won't change that unless you're somehow put into a super-slow metabolic state in which case you'd think the world went into hyper-speed. 950 years or so of no ability to have sex without a penis support and no real ability to have orgasm? Blech!!!
  • by viva_fourier ( 232973 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @12:40AM (#10999797) Journal
    ...and we now sadly bid adieu to the doggy hind-leg cart.
  • How strange. This very same stuff is used as a green wood preservative. Maybe it could preserve brain cells too. Or not.
    • Re:PEG (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      It is also used in stage smoke machines.
    • > How strange. This very same stuff is used as a green wood preservative. Maybe it could preserve brain cells too. Or not.

      While it might work, the difference likely wouldn't be noticeable in most people, since they weren't used in the first place.

  • by F13 ( 9091 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @12:44AM (#10999819)
    The other day there was a Sciencedaily article [sciencedaily.com] on a guy who recoved from nerve damage after a liver transplant.

    Although his problem was due to "a 20-year history of drinking more than 100g of alcohol per day who had end-stage liver disease and weakness in both legs."

  • Hmmmmm......sounds like some of the experiments the 13 year old kid next door tried on the neighborhood pets.....only he used Windex.
  • by dvd_tude ( 69482 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @12:45AM (#10999824)
    ... besides eating and burrowing under the covers in one's bed.

    (I'd wish they had tried this on my Roxy when she blew a disk a couple of years back.)
  • I wonder where they found this nice group of injured dogs to test that stuff on. I can just see, "get the bat Bill, swing hard and crack its spine, then we'll cure it with PEG". I know it will help people but still makes me wonder.
    • Notice that they said they used it on dogs carried in by their owners for emergency treatment after they proved it on the 19 dogs, and took care to only use it on animals that had similar injuries to the animals in the original study - they aren't this nice to people in clinical studies (remember the double-blind studies on interferon, where some terminal cancer patients got placebos?), let alone the studies done on people on welfare (there was a medicine used on me as a child that caused a severe allergic
    • Popular Science ran an article about just that in November with their "Worst Jobs in Science" sequel. Read the cute and cuddly here: Lab-Animal Veterinarian [popsci.com].
    • Vets in cities that have universities that do this kind of research get regular requests to refer certain problems to the University research clinic studies.

      I took a kitten with an eye infection (of the rare, hard to treat, and sight-threatening kind) to the vet and the kitty ended up being the first in the state to be cured with a new drug they were testing. It had been animal-tested (in rabbits), approved for humans, proved in humans, and was making full-circle to being tested in various other species.

  • by IO ERROR ( 128968 ) <error@ioe[ ]r.us ['rro' in gap]> on Sunday December 05, 2004 @12:52AM (#10999863) Homepage Journal
    liquid body armor [slashdot.org], tattoos [slashdot.org], to treat constipation [nih.gov], as a cleaning agent [lindachae.com], to stabilize green wood [leevalley.com], in cosmetics and many other applications.

    Material Safety Data Sheet [rpi.edu]

  • We just don't have any federal funding for the subset of "embryonic."
    • by Anonymous Coward
      Actually, we do have federal funding for embryonic, but limited to existing stem cell lines. Privately funded research can do whatever the hell it wants, and otherwise smart scientists bitch about Bush banning the research.
  • by deathazre ( 761949 ) <mreedsmith@gmail.com> on Sunday December 05, 2004 @12:55AM (#10999867)
    confused polyethylene glycol with ethylene glycol and wondered what they were doing injecting antifreeze into dogs (and wouldn't it be easier to put it in their water dish?)
  • by Bill_Royle ( 639563 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @01:26AM (#10999987)
    Does that mean we'll have to refer to these recovered dogs as PEG-legs?
  • A little discussion (Score:4, Interesting)

    by maximilln ( 654768 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @01:54AM (#11000071) Homepage Journal
    I didn't know that PEG had therapeutic uses. I've always seen it as a solid support for reagents used in chemical reactions. As a chemist, I like PEG because it's inert to a majority of chemical reactions and is insoluble in many common laboratory solvents.

    In this study I imagine they're using a solubilized form of PEG. It's probably a lower polymeric weight and in a polar/protic solvent--probably aqueous.

    There are a few parts of the article which struck me as questionable, though:

    PEG is able to stop this cascade of injury by repairing initial membrane damage

    I don't think PEG so much repairs anything as it insulates the cells from each other so that they can all repair themselves without the toxic necrosis products causing further harm. I imagine that PEG also helps to moderate pH and prevent further damage that way.

    or by fusing two damaged cells together into a larger functional nerve cell.

    That's a neat theory. I doubt it.

    Significantly, the polymer is attracted only to damaged nerve cells and tissue when it's injected into the blood stream. It doesn't move into undamaged regions nearby.

    That's another neat theory. The pharmaceutical industry would love to know how a molecule with no particular shape or form manages to distinguish between "good" and "bad" cells. I'd be interested to see where the authoring reporter received this idea. I doubt highly that this is from a study of "inject in arm, observe in spine". Most likely the injection site was very close to the damages area and the injected aliquot had a mass and volume low enough to make distribution arbitrarily interpretable.
    • Yes, I used to work in plant science, focusing on salt tolerance work in particular. Although I didn't personally use PEG, I know from my readings that it is used in for some aspects of salinity and water relations. It is used for research into how plants deal with water deficit because it can be used to lower osmotic potential without causing toxic effects to cells. Using salts and other ionic compounds does also lower the potential, but it can have bad side effects. PEG allows water potential to be invest
    • In this study I imagine they're using a solubilized form of PEG. It's probably a lower polymeric weight and in a polar/protic solvent--probably aqueous.

      Yeah, the solubility depends a lot on the molecular weight of their PEG. I've done a bit of work in drug development, and one of the techniques used to improve the solubility of certain very nonpolar drug candidates is to stick a nice, soluble PEG group on. As you say, it's well suited to work in aqueous systems--like blood.

      That's a neat theory. I doub

  • IIRC when I first saw this study (the article makes only oblique reference) PEG can be given via IV. This should be studied in the prehospital setting, so that eventually, we won't think of it as a "hospital" thing, but as a prehospital treatment modality by EMT-Intermediates and Paramedics (after all, you don't hurt your cervical spine at the hospital, you do it in the car wreck, or in that fall, or in that shallow dive...)
  • Head Injury Too? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by 0111 1110 ( 518466 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @02:47AM (#11000203)
    I wonder if this would work for head injuries too. the same problem occurs with cascading neural damage after the injury. I don't know if I'd be inclined to inject some PEG directly into my brain though. We seem to have a natural aversion to injecting anything into our brains.

    God knows what I would have done if I had noticed this article before my accident. I wonder if I would have been crazy enough.

    wrt head injuries it has been found that progesterone also provides some protective effect if administered within 48 hours of the injury. Of course, women have less need for this and typically recover better from head injuries. I wonder if this would be true for spinal cord injuries as well.
  • Go To The Source (Score:5, Informative)

    by Eponymous Mallard ( 172221 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @02:49AM (#11000207)
    Whenever I read such an article in the popular press I always try to access the actual scientific journal article about the study. In this case the study was published in the December 2004 issue of The Journal of Neurotrauma which is available online [liebertpub.com]. Just click in the link labelled "Scientists Reverse Paralysis in Dogs" and you can download the complet pdf file of the research paper. (I hope they don't mind being slashdotted.)

    Here is the abstract [liebertonline.com] of the article:

    Lavert, PH et al. A Preliminary Study of Intravenous Surfactants in Paraplegic Dogs: Polymer Therapy in Canine Clinical SCI. Journal of Neurotrauma. December 2004, Vol. 21, No. 12, Pages 1767-1777

    Hydrophilic polymers, both surfactants and triblock polymers, are known to seal defects in cell membranes. In previous experiments using laboratory animals, we have exploited this capability using polyethylene glycol (PEG) to repair spinal axons after severe, standardized spinal cord injury (SCI) in guinea pigs. Similar studies were conducted using a related co-polymer Poloxamer 188 (P 188). Here we carried out initial investigations of an intravenous application of PEG or P 188 (3500 Daltons, 30% w/w in saline; 2 mL/kg I.V. and 2 mL/kg body weight or 300 mL P 188 per kg, respectively) to neurologically complete cases of paraplegia in dogs. Our aim was to first determine if this is a clinically safe procedure in cases of severe naturally occurring SCI in dogs. Secondarily, we wanted to obtain preliminary evidence if this therapy could be of clinical benefit when compared to a larger number of similar, but historical, control cases. Strict entry criteria permitted recruitment of only neurologically complete paraplegic dogs into this study. Animals were treated by a combination of conventional and experimental techniques within 72 h of admission for spinal trauma secondary to acute, explosive disk herniation. Outcome measures consisted of measurements of voluntary ambulation, deep and superficial pain perception, conscious proprioception in hindlimbs, and evoked potentials (somatosensory evoked potentials [SSEP]). We determined that polymer injection is a safe adjunct to the conventional management of severe neurological injury in dogs. We did not observe any unacceptable clinical response to polymer injection; there were no deaths, nor any other problem arising from, or associated with, the procedures. Outcome measures over the 68-week trial were improved by polymer injection when compared to historical cases. This recovery was unexpectedly rapid compared to these comparator groups. The results of this pilot trial provides evidence consistent with the notion that the injection of inorganic polymers in acute neurotrauma may be a simple and useful intervention during the acute phase of the injury.

    Eponymous Mallard. "It it quacks like a duck, it may be the Eponymous Mallard."

    • Reading the original is a great idea, because there's pressure on the original to present the results honestly. For example, the title is "A Preliminary Study", and the conclusion in the abstract is that this study "..provides evidence consistent with the notion...".

      The Slashdot title is wrong when it says this treatment "helps cure". There's very little evidence that the effect will be reproducible. There was no control group in the study, so the possibility is very great that a selection bias was entir
  • by multiplexo ( 27356 ) on Sunday December 05, 2004 @03:41AM (#11000322) Journal
    neurodegenerative diseases such as ALS (Lou Gehrig's disease), Parkinsonism or Huntington's Chorea. I recall reading somewhere that one of the reasons these diseases are so damaging is that as they kill neurons chemicals are released which cause further neuronal apoptosis in a chain reaction.

    • Probably not. If you look it up polyethylene glycol [sci-toys.com] is a "stabilizer/thickener" and relatively inert. ITs function in spinal injuries is to , in effect, coat the injured nerves in a way that prevents some unhelpful things ["glutamate cascade"? in the case of strokes] that the body does for injured nerve tissue...its effect may almost be mechanical more than biochemical.
  • ...and no jokes about anti-freeze?!?
  • by DynaSoar ( 714234 ) * on Sunday December 05, 2004 @09:20AM (#11000883) Journal
    They're not injecting antifreeze, they're injecting a food additive. Ethylene glycol is antifreeze. Polyethylene glycol is what makes your Mountain Dew syrupy.

  • When you are preparing blood for freezing (long term storage of rare types) or freezing cell cultures, or sperm and probably even embryos, the cells are mixed in with PEG because it stabilizes the cell memnranes.

    It's not much of a leap to go from this to trying in in live animals.

  • it is a simple and potentially cheap way to get many of the benefits for spinal injury

    I didn't know that there were any benefits to a spinal injury...
  • Then why isn't it being privately funded? The only thing Bush did was to allow an extremely small number of stem cells to actually be studied WITH FEDERAL MONEY, more than any previous president ever did. That doesn't mean a private firm could not do stem cell research themselves. Why can't a Pharma company do it, for example? In fact, if stem cells are so great, then, how come half the people bitching about studying them aren't doing it themselves, or donating to groups that do support them?

    The entire

Today is a good day for information-gathering. Read someone else's mail file.

Working...