DAVID GRANOVSKY

SPINAL INJURY CELL TREATMENTS MISINFORMATION

In STEM CELLS IN THE NEWS on November 12, 2012 at 8:50 pm

Xray of cervical spine

Unfortunately, there certainly is still a great deal of misinformation in the media today. While spinal cord injury stem cell treatments are going on successfully today, articles like the following are confusing.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22235-stem-cells-bring-back-feeling-for-paralysed-patients.html

THIS ARTICLE STATES: “For the first time, people with broken spines have recovered feeling in previously paralyzed areas after receiving injections of neural stem cells.”
THE FACT IS: This is a blatant lie (or ignorance). Spinal cord injury has been successfully treated with adult stem cells for a few years now.  The following are a few of the stories.  https://repairstemcell.wordpress.com/2011/02/07/spinal-cord-injury-and-repair-stem-cell-treatments/

Some people regain sensitivity in their extremities, some gain bladder and bowel control and some are capable of walking with a walker. The limits of improvement are yet to be seen, but this is definitely NOT even close to the first.

 

THIS ARTICLE STATES:  “The cells, acquired from donated fetal brain tissue…”

THE FACT IS:  While these are not embryonic stem cells (a fetus starts at 7 weeks so they are technically ‘adult’ or non-embryonic stem cells), the back lash from the religious right on the use of fetal brain tissue, donated or not, is going to be extreme.  There should be no risk of cysts and tumors as these cells are already differentiated but let’s wait and see.

 

THE ARTICLE STATES:  “The patients also received a temporary course of immunosuppressive drugs to limit rejection of the cells.”

THE FACT IS:  Donated (or allogenic) stem cells carry the risk of graft versus-host disease (GVHD) or rejection so the immune system must be suppressed.  When you are dealing with illness or in this case, spinal cord injury, lowering the immune system with immunosuppressive drugs carries inherent risks.

 

I will take a position of cautious optimism and wait and see the results.  So the only question remaining to be asked is:  Autologous (from the aprient) stem cells carry none of these risks.  Why were they not used?

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: