DAVID GRANOVSKY

Posts Tagged ‘pluripotent’

MULTIPOTENT STROMAL STEM CELLS FROM PLACENTAL TISSUE DEMONSTRATE HIGH THERAPEUTIC POTENTIAL

In STEM CELLS IN THE NEWS on December 11, 2012 at 9:00 am

placenta

Scientists at Children’s Hospital Oakland Research Institute (CHORI) led by Vladimir Serikov, MD, PhD, and Frans Kuypers, PhD, report in the current Epub issue of Stem Cells Translational Medicine that placental stem cells with important therapeutic properties can be harvested in large quantities from the fetal side of human term placentas called the chorion.

The chorion is a part of the afterbirth and is normally discarded after delivery, but it contains stem cells of fetal origin that appear to be pluripotent — i.e., they can differentiate into different types of human cells, such as lung, liver, or brain cells. Since these functional placental stem cells can be isolated from either fresh or frozen term human placentas, this implies that if each individual’s placenta is stored at birth instead of thrown away, these cells can be harvested in the future if therapeutic need arises. This potential represents a major breakthrough in the stem cell field.

In previous work, Drs. Serikov and Kuypers reported a novel technology to harvest blood-forming stem cells from the placenta to augment cord blood cells. These cells are “siblings” of the cord blood derived stem cells. Cord blood stem cells, unlike embryonic stem cells, have been used for many hundreds of successful bone marrow transplants. These transplants are mainly performed in children, as the amount of cells that can be harvested from cord blood is usually not sufficient for a successful transplant in adults. Adding placental-derived stem cells to the cord blood stem cells could make successful adult bone marrow transplants routinely possible.

The current report demonstrates that placental stem cells have much broader therapeutic potential than bone-marrow transplants, because they are pluripotent — i.e. able to differentiate into many different cell types — and they also generate growth factors that help in tissue repair. These cells are shown to integrate into different tissues when transplanted into mice, but like cord blood stem cells, and in contrast to embryonic pluripotent stem cells, they do not form tumor-like structures in mice.

Placental-derived stem cells are often viewed as “adult” stem cells in contrast to “embryonic” stem cells, which are the dominant focus in the stem cell research field. However, this report shows that these fetal stem cells can be harvested in large numbers, and without the ethical concerns attached to the use of embryonic stem cells. These stem cells may thus be a more practical source for regenerative medicine, particularly since, if placentas are routinely saved instead of thrown away, each individual will be able to draw on their own fetal stem cells if future therapeutic needs arise.

Placental stem cells are only 9 months old, and in contrast to adult stem cells, do not need to be reprogrammed to become pluripotent. Placental-derived stem cells have characteristics of young and vigorous cells, including young mitochondria. Future research will be aimed to bring this to the clinic and to test their efficacy in translational therapeutic applications.

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120518132250.htm

PLURUIPOTENT STEM CELLS, A POTENTIALLY INVALUABLE THERAPEUTIC RESOURCE

In SCIENCE & STEM CELLS on November 21, 2012 at 7:44 am

B0007671 Mouse embryonic stem cells

Pluripotent stem cells are potentially an invaluable therapeutic resource, as shown in a recent study conducted by the Stanford University School of Medicine.  Within this study, researchers found that with appropriate initial coaching of cells and through the use of environmental cues, the human body has the ability to direct differentiation of cells.

 

Pluripotent stem cells are nature’s double-edged sword. Because they can develop into a dizzying variety of cell types and tissues, they are a potentially invaluable therapeutic resource. However, that same developmental flexibility can lead to dangerous tumors called teratomas if the stem cells begin to differentiate out of control in the body.

To prevent this outcome, researchers must first give the cells a not-so-subtle shove toward their final developmental fate before transplanting them into laboratory animals or humans. But exactly how to do so can vary widely among laboratories. Now researchers at the Stanford University School of Medicine have used an experiment in mice to hit upon a way to possibly skip this fiddly step by instead relying mostly on signals within the body to keep the stem cells in line.

“Before we can use these cells, we have to differentiate, or ‘coach,’ them down a specific developmental pathway,” said Michael Longaker, MD, the Deane P. and Louise Mitchell Professor in the School of Medicine. “But there’s always a question as to exactly how to do that, and how many developmental doors we have to close before we can use the cells. In this study, we found that, with appropriate environmental cues, we could let the body do the work.”

Allowing the body to direct differentiation could speed the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s approval of using such pluripotent stem cells, Longaker believes, by eliminating the extended periods of laboratory manipulation required during the forced differentiation of the cells.

Longaker, who co-directs Stanford’s Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, is the senior author of the research, published online Nov. 19 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Postdoctoral scholars Benjamin Levi, MD, and Jeong Hyun, MD, and research assistant Daniel Montoro are co-first authors of the work. Longaker is also a member of the Stanford Cancer Institute.

“Once we identify the key proteins and signals coaching the tissue within the body, we can try to mimic them when we use the stem cells,” said Longaker. “Just as the shape of water is determined by its container, cells respond to external cues. For example, in the future, if you want to replace a failing liver, you could put the cells in a scaffold or microenvironment that strongly promotes liver cell differentiation and place the cell-seeded scaffold into the liver to let them differentiate in the optimal macroenvironment

http://med.stanford.edu/ism/2012/november/longaker.html

STEM CELLS 101 – making sense of the mess

In ALL ARTICLES on September 23, 2011 at 4:21 am

STEM CELLS MAKING YOU CRAZY?!!!

https://i2.wp.com/www.thedogandthediva.com/wp-content/uploads/confused.bmp

Embryonic? Adult? induced Pluripotent? Omnipotent? Tutipotent? Umbilical? Fetal? Placental? Mesynchymal? Adipose?  Are you confused by it all?

CAN ANYONE MAKE SENSE OF THIS MESS OF INFORMATION!?!?!

STEM CELLS 101

ADULT STEM CELL = ASC

  • SOURCE/DERIVED FROM•comes from blood, umbilical cords, bone marrow, placenta fat tissue, muscle, nasal neurological, breast milk, menstruation, dental pulp, and many more
  • PURPOSE IN BODY•they are the body’s natural healing cells
  • OBSTACLES+SIDE EFFECTS•~zero problems (virtually zero side effects)
  • TREATMENT HISTORY•used in bone marrow transplants to treat cancer for 40 years
  • TREATMENT HISTORY•can currently treat 130+ diseases safely and effectively (CP, MS, Autism, Diabetes, CHF, PAD, etc)

EMBRYONIC STEM CELL = ESC

  • SOURCE/DERIVED FROM•comes from embryos
  • PURPOSE IN BODY•split for 7 weeks until you have a fetus the size of a thumbnail
  • OBSTACLES+SIDE EFFECTS•they create cysts and tumors, rejection requires immunosuppressive drugs for the ill patient, they carry the genetic anomalies of the donor, etc
  • TREATMENT HISTORY•can currently treat zero diseases, probably need to cure cancer first to use them

INDUCED PLURIPOTENT STEM CELL = iPSC (“Embryonic Stem Cell Lite”)

  • SOURCE/DERIVED FROM•comes from regular adult cells like skin cells that are then transformed by scientists into stem cells
  • PURPOSE IN BODY•to be a skin cell or other tissue
  • OBSTACLES+SIDE EFFECTS•they create cysts and tumors, rejection requires immunosuppressive drugs for the ill patient, they carry the genetic anomalies of the donor…
  • TREATMENT HISTORY•no treatments to date, probably need to cure cancer first to use them
FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT A SPECIFIC DISEASE OR STEM CELL TREATMENT COSTS AND INFORMATION OR TO LEARN WHERE PATIENTS CAN BE TREATED TODAY, PLEASE CONTACT ME: dsgrano@gmail.com

 

ADULT CELLS, STEM CELLS & CANCER

In ALL ARTICLES on September 21, 2011 at 2:19 pm

Wow, this one was devious!! Some of these articles must be read very carefully as they are misleading and confusing, perhaps even intentionally so.

http://elrodsgodisney.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/confused_mickey_mouse_poster-p228990749419197094vhwx0_328-e1309635341795.jpg?w=197&h=281They start by telling you ‘adult stem cells‘ may fight cancer….

but later in the article refer to them as ‘adult cells…’

and even later as ‘induced pluripotent stem cells.’

But don’t be fooled by this semantic sleight of hand.

Induced pluripotent stem cells are semantically ‘adult cells’ only in the sense that all cells in an adult can be referred to as adult cells.  Perhaps this is the author’s attempt to make them distinct from embryonic cells. In any case, if your friend asks you for an APPLE from the MARKET, it is not acceptable to bring him back a BAG OF FLOUR just because they both can be “found at a MARKET.”

ANd let’s be clear.  Only ADULT STEM CELLS have thousands of studies and trials and thousands of patients treated safely and effectively.  Induced pluripotent stem cells have NONE.  And while Induced pluripotent stem cells ARE a manipulated type of ‘stem cell,’ they have a lot of problems too, as the article owns up to (one of the problems) in the end:

potential side effects need to be considered. iPS cells may develop into other harmful cells in the body.”

              “other harmful cells in the body”  =  tumors, cysts, cancer

THEY HAVE TO SOLVE THE ISSUES OF REJECTION & CANCER BEFORE THEY CAN

  1. USE THESE CELLS TO COMBAT CANCER!!
  2. USE THESE CELLS IN STEM CELL TREATMENTS!!

(dichotomy? I think so, makes me think of vaccines where you get injected with the disease to build anti-bodies to the disease.)

But the good news is, there are cancer treatments out there with high results and low or virtually no side effects that make chemo and radiation look ineffective and barbaric by comparison!

———————————————————-

Stem cells, potential source of cancer-fighting T cells

ScienceDaily (Sep. 20, 2011) — Adult stem cells from mice converted to antigen-specific T cells — the immune cells that fight cancer tumor cells — show promise in cancer immunotherapy and may lead to a simpler, more efficient way to use the body’s immune system to fight cancer, according to Penn State College of Medicine researchers.

“Cancer immunotherapy is a promising method to treat cancer patients,” said Jianxsun Song, Ph.D., assistant professor, microbiology and immunology. “Tumors grow because patients lack the kind of antigen-specific T cells needed to kill the cancer. An approach called adoptive T cell immunotherapy generates the T cells outside the body, which are then used inside the body to target cancer cells.”

It is complex and expensive to expand T cell lines in the lab, so researchers have been searching for ways to simplify the process. Song and his team found a way to use induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells, which are adult cells that are genetically changed to be stem cells.

“Any cell can become a stem cell,” Song explained. “It’s a very good approach to generating the antigen-specific T cells and creates an unlimited source of cells for adoptive immunotherapy.”

By inserting DNA, researchers change the mouse iPS cells into immune cells and inject them into mice with tumors. After 50 days, 100 percent of the mice in the study were still alive, compared to 55 percent of control mice, which received tumor-reactive immune cells isolated from donors.

Researchers reported their results and were featured as the cover story in a recent issue of the journal Cancer Research.

A limitation of this potential therapy is that it currently takes at least six weeks for the iPS cells to develop into T cells in the body. In addition, potential side effects need to be considered. iPS cells may develop into other harmful cells in the body.

Researchers are now studying how to use the process in human cells.

Other researchers on this paper are Fengyang Lei, and Rizwanul Haque, Department of Microbiology and Immunology; Lynn Budgeon and Neil D. Christensen, Ph.D., Department of Pathology, Penn State College of Medicine.

This study was funded through the Pennsylvania Department of Health using Tobacco Settlement Funds, the W.W. Smith Charitable Trust and the Melanoma Research Foundation.

ADULT STEM CELLS ARE STILL THE ONLY WAY TO GO

In ALL ARTICLES on March 30, 2011 at 1:00 pm

Recent research has shown once again that only adult stem cells are capable of treating humans.  Embryonic stem cells generate cysts and tumors and Induced Pluripotent stem cells develop genetic abnormalities when they are used.  (Induced Pluripotent stem cells are those stem cells created by scientist who take simple adult skin cells and then regress them to an embryonic like state – see article below) – dg

https://i1.wp.com/www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v27/n11/images/nbt1109-977-I1.gif

Genetic Abnormalities Discovered After Creation of (induced pluripotent) Stem Cells

—————————————————————

Discovery sheds new light on the process of stem cell generation, and will help promote safer stem-cell based studies and future clinical trials
Thursday, 10 March 2011

Dr. Andras Nagy’s laboratory at the Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute of Mount Sinai Hospital and Dr. Timo Otonkoski’s laboratory at Biomedicum Stem Cell Center, University of Helsinki, as well as collaborators in Europe and Canada have identified genetic abnormalities associated with reprogramming adult cells to induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells. The findings give researchers new insights into the reprogramming process, and will help make future applications of stem cell creation and subsequent use safer.

The study was published in Nature.

The team showed that the reprogramming process for generating iPS cells (i.e., cells that can then be ‘coaxed’ to become a variety of cell types for use in regenerative medicine) is associated with inherent DNA damage.

This damage is detected in the form of genetic rearrangements and ‘copy number variations,’ which are alterations of DNA in which a region of the genome is either deleted or amplified on certain chromosomes. The variability may either be inherited, or caused by de novo mutation.

“Our analysis shows that these genetic changes are a result of the reprogramming process itself, which raises the concern that the resultant cell lines are mutant or defective,” said Dr. Nagy, a Senior Investigator at the Lunenfeld.

“These mutations could alter the properties of the stem cells, affecting their applications in studying degenerative conditions and screening for drugs to treat diseases. In the longer term, this discovery has important implications in the use of these cells for replacement therapies in regenerative medicine.”

“Our study also highlights the need for rigorous characterization of generated iPS lines, especially since several groups are currently trying to enhance reprogramming efficiency,” said Dr. Samer Hussein, a McEwen post-doctoral scientist who initiated these studies with Dr. Otonkoski, before completing them with Dr. Nagy.

“For example, increasing the efficiency of reprogramming may actually reduce the quality of the cells in the long run, if genomic integrity is not accurately assessed.”

The researchers used a molecular technique called single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) analysis to study stem cell lines, and specifically to compare the number of copy number variations in both early and intermediate-stage human iPS cells with their respective parental, originating cells.

Drs. Nagy and Otonkoski and their teams found that iPS cells had more genetic abnormalities than their originating cells and embryonic stem cells. Interestingly, however, the simple process of growing the freshly generated iPS cells for a few weeks selected against the highly mutant cell lines, and thus most of the genetic abnormalities were eventually ‘weeded out.’

“However, some of the mutations are beneficial for the cells and they may survive during continued growth,” said Dr. Otonkoski, Director and Senior Scientist at the Biomedicum Stem Cell Center.

Stem cells have been widely touted as a source of great hope for use in regenerative medicine, as well as in the development of new drugs to prevent and treat illnesses including Parkinson’s disease, spinal cord injury and macular degeneration. But techniques for generating these uniquely malleable cells have also opened a Pandora’s Box of concerns and ethical quandaries. Health Canada, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the European Union consider stem cells to be drugs under federal legislation, and as such, subject to the same regulations.

“Our results suggest that whole genome analysis should be included as part of quality control of iPS cell lines to ensure that these cells are genetically normal after the reprogramming process, and then use them for disease studies and/or clinical applications,” said Dr. Nagy.

“Rapid development of the technologies in genome-wide analyses will make this more feasible in the future,” said Dr. Otonkoski.

“In addition, there is a need to further explore if other methods might mitigate the amount of DNA damage generated during the generation of stem cells,” both investigators agreed.

HHMI News: Stem Cells Recall Their Origins

In ALL ARTICLES on July 23, 2010 at 3:40 am

In 1983, Tom Cruise played the character ‘Stefan Djordjevic’ in the movie “All the Right Moves” opposite Lea Thompson.  In “All the Right Moves,” Mr Cruise plays “a headstrong high school football star who dreams of getting out of his small Western Pennsylvania steel town with a football scholarship.”  He is hampered by, among other things, his small town upbringing and meager origins.

https://i0.wp.com/img4.ifilmpro.com/blog//1/8/7/5/1875583/200901/1232660189436.jpg

It turns out, Mr Cruises’ character has something in common with Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells…they too are held back by where they came from and who they are/were.

“Dr. George Daley, director of the Stem Cell Transplantation Program at Children’s Hospital Boston and a Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator, and colleagues reported in the journal Nature that iPS cells retain an “epigenetic memory” of their origins; they remember whether they came from skin or muscle or blood.” Via

[Epigenetic memory is a process by which changes in gene expression are passed on through mitosis or meiosis through factors other than DNA sequence.  Epigenetic memory in stem cells is a limiting factor…read: “not good.”]

Stem Cells Recall Their Origins – July 19, 2010

Cells, it turns out, remember where they came from. Four years ago, scientists made a breakthrough in stem cell research, when they discovered how to turn back the developmental clock on skin cells, muscle cells, and other “adult” cells so the cells would behave like embryonic stem cells. These induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS cells) were touted as an alternative to the ethically contentious embryonic stem cells.

Now, though, two groups of Howard Hughes Medical Institute researchers report that iPS cells retain a genetic memory of their tissue of origin. In a sense, the iPS cells “remember” that they came from skin, muscle, blood, and so on. This memory impedes the transformation of iPS cells into other types of cells, a prospect that has deep implications for researchers working with these kinds of cells, say HHMI investigator George Q. Daley and HHMI early career scientist Konrad Hochedlinger, who led the two research groups. The scientists worked independently but shared manuscripts and coordinated joint publications on July 19, 2010 in Nature (Daley) and Nature Biotechnology (Hochedlinger).

“But iPS [induced pluripotent stem cells] cells often don’t function as well as embryonic cells, and our new research offers an explanation as to why that is the case.” – George Q. Daley

Creating iPS cells is an important research tool because the technique can be used to generate disease-specific stem cell lines that, like embryonic stem cells, can develop into many cell types.

“The backdrop to this research is that a lot of people have the impression that iPS cells are the equivalent of embryonic stem cells,” says Daley. “That has been used as an argument that we do not need to keep studying embryonic stem cells. But iPS cells often don’t function as well as embryonic cells, and our new research offers an explanation as to why that is the case.”…

via HHMI News: Stem Cells Recall Their Origins.

Stem-cell furore erupts : Nature News

In STEM CELLS IN THE NEWS on June 29, 2010 at 2:21 pm

What are iPSc?  iPSc are INDUCED PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS.  In short, a scientist takes a skin cell, typically from the foreskin or testes, and regresses or devolves them into an embryonic-like stem cell (sort of like a test tube version of Benjamin Button).

It was originally hoped that IPSc would hold great promise because they had all of the benefits of embryonic stem cells (read – Pluripotency: the ability to differentiate into any of the 320+ cells in the human body) and none of the drawbacks.  Here is what we know about Embryonic stem cells:

  1. Embryonic stem cells form Cysts/Tumors
  2. Embryonic stem cells are associated with tons of Controversy
  3. After 10 years, no treatments have been developed from embryonic stem cells
  4. Many of the foremost Embryonic stem cell scientists have abandoned embryonic research for adult stem cell and iPSc research

Now, here’s the kicker.  After 2 years, extensive research based on the originally ground breaking article and a huge media following (over 4,000,000 hits on google), it turns out that not only DO iPSc form cysts/tumors…but they also may NOT be pluripotent at all.

Why did it take so long?  “Skutella (the author of the original paper)  and his co-authors said that they wanted to share the cells but that the original agreement signed by tissue donors precluded distribution to third parties….even though Nature requires its authors to share all published research resources”

Regardless of how this turns out, I guess iPSc are like embryonic stem cells:

  1. iPSc form Cysts/Tumors (like embryonic stem cells)
  2. iPSc are NOW associated with tons of Controversy (like embryonic stem cells)
  3. After 2 years, no treatments have been developed from iPSc (like embryonic stem cells)

Is this a witch hunt on Skutella? Is this a fraud perpetrated by him? Is this just a misunderstanding?  It remains to be seen but as a pivitol paper that has launched (or may end) an entire field of research and commercial treatment potential, a certain degree of data transparency should be expected.

Since when does scientific research have more drama than Grey’s Anatomy? Keep your “Eyes on the Ball” guys, “Eyes on the Ball!”  -dg

——————————————————————-

Stem-cell furore erupts

Data analysis ignites public row.

Published online 29 June 2010 | Nature | doi:10.1038/466017a – Alison Abbott

Thomas Skutella.

Long-rumbling hostilities between stem-cell researchers in Germany exploded into a blazing public row last week, after Nature published a critical reanalysis of data from a high-profile 2008 article.

The researchers behind the original work1, led by Thomas Skutella of the University of Tübingen, reported using cells from adult human testes to create pluripotent stem cells with similar properties to embryonic stem cells.

Unlike other adult cells, these reproductive or ‘germline’ stem cells can be reprogrammed for pluripotency without the need to introduce additional genes, a step that often relies on a virus. That could make them safer for future use in medicine.

The paper made headlines because such pluripotent stem cells might be used instead of ethically sensitive human embryonic tissue. Soon after its publication, however, some stem-cell scientists said that the evidence for pluripotency was unconvincing. They also complained that Skutella would not distribute cells to other labs for verification, even though Nature requires its authors to share all published research resources.

Hans Schöler, a director at the Max Planck Institute for Molecular Biomedicine in Münster and an author of last week’s critical comment2, says that he proclaimed Skutella’s achievement as a breakthrough when he first saw the data at a meeting, but became doubtful after seeing the published paper. “If this paper is wrong, then a lot of scientists are wasting time, energy and money in trying to follow up on it,” he says. Others fear that the episode is undermining the credibility of the field.

In response, Skutella last week asked the DFG, Germany’s main research-funding agency, to conduct an investigation both of his paper in Nature and of what he claims is a witch-hunt against him. Schöler, who also works with germline stem cells, says that he would welcome such a move.

Pluripotent cells should form teratomas (often cancerous cysts) — encapsulated tumours comprising different cell types — when injected under the skin of mice, and also exhibit a particular profile of gene expression. “The teratoma pictures in the Nature paper were not terribly convincing but that didn’t concern me too much at first,” says Schöler. “It was the failure to provide cells that started to concern me.” After more than a year of requests for access, he decided to reanalyse data in the paper in Nature showing which genes in the disputed cells were being expressed.

Together with bioinformaticians, he compared the genes’ expression profile with those of other cells in public databases and found that it overlapped with a type of connective-tissue cell called fibroblasts but not with pluripotent stem cells. Schöler suggests that fibroblasts may have contaminated Skutella’s samples. But Skutella and his colleagues deny3 mistaking fibroblasts for pluripotent cells. Skutella says that comparison of gene-expression data is meaningless “if the cells being compared were not processed identically”.

Takashi Shinohara at Kyoto University in Japan, whose team in 2004 generated the first pluripotent germline stem cells from mice, shares Schöler’s concerns about the expression data. He says that fibroblasts and pluripotent cells have different gene-expression profiles even if the cells are not processed in similar ways, and adds that it would be helpful to see Skutella’s cells.

In a corrigendum to his original paper in August 2009, Skutella and his co-authors said that they wanted to share the cells but that the original agreement signed by tissue donors precluded distribution to third parties. (Really???) Having gained broader consent from some donors, Skutella now promises to distribute the cells once they have been quality-checked. But stem-cell researcher Rudolf Jaenisch at the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts, is not impressed: “It’s a big problem not providing the cells for what is nearly two years — whatever the excuses, this is bad.”

Ulrike Beisiegel, ombudsman for the DFG, says her office will decide “soon” whether to take up the investigations.

via Stem-cell furore erupts : Nature News.

Still No Truce in the Stem-Cell Wars…Why (INDUCED PLURIPOTENT!!) Adult Cells Won’t End the Stem-Cell Wars – Newsweek.com

In STEM CELLS IN THE NEWS on February 11, 2010 at 8:35 pm

SO much confusing info (or perhaps, misinformation). Let me try to explain this…

Still No Truce in the Stem-Cell Wars

A new study finds serious problems with stem cells produced from adult cells. (they are referring to induced pluripotent stem cells – dg)

By Sharon Begley | Newsweek Web Exclusive  Feb 11, 2010

“Embryonic” and “senescent” aren’t supposed to go together any more than “good” and “grief” or other oxymorons, which is why biologist Robert Lanza was “devastated” when he saw what was happening with the human stem cells he and colleagues were trying to grow. Like hundreds of other stem-cell scientists, they had been intrigued and energized by the 2007 discovery that adult cells can be regressed back to an embryonic state simply by inserting four genes into them. The discovery, by scientists at Kyoto University and the University of Wisconsin-Madison, seemed to promise a way out of the bitter debates over embryonic-stem-cell research: rather than using human embryos as a source of stem cells, produce them from adult cells.

…they are of course,  completely ignoring the benefits, success and safety record of ADULT STEM CELLS  https://repairstemcell.wordpress.com/2009/10/10/do-stem-cell-treatments-work/ – dg

Like cells from days-old embryos, the resulting induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells have the ability to differentiate into any of 220 kinds of human cells, from neurons to retinal cells to pancreatic cells.

…btw, a number of adult stem cells have been found that can differentiate into any of 220 kinds of human cells, from neurons to retinal cells to pancreatic cells.- dg

Their promise was so great that when President Obama announced last March that he was lifting the ban on the use of federal money for research on human embryonic stem cells, critics on the right were apoplectic: iPS cells, they said, made such a move scientifically unjustified. Even President George W. Bush’s bioethics council cited the promise of iPS cells in chastising Obama).

…Proposition 71, that earmarked $3 billion of funding for embryonic stem cells for treatment research (in California), has been deemed a failure.  The majority of those funds are now being transferred into ADULT STEM CELL research for treatment. https://repairstemcell.wordpress.com/2010/02/02/investors-com-californias-proposition-71-failure/ – dg

Lanza, the chief scientific officer at Advanced Cell Technology, and colleagues shared the optimism about iPS cells. They were trying to grow various types of cells from the iPS cells. It went fine at first, with the iPS cells differentiating into blood, vascular, and retinal cells as intended, the scientists are reporting today in the journal Stem Cells. But things went south fast. Compared with specialized cells produced from the 25 lines of stem cells derived from embryos, those from the eight populations of iPS cells in the study had significantly higher rates of death through a mechanism called apoptosis (which is basically a suicide program within the cells), higher rates of aging (senescence), and severely lower rates of growth. The retinal cells and blood-vessel cells in particular were about as sprightly as cells ready for a nursing home, and lost their crucial ability to continue dividing…

via Why Adult Cells Won’t End the Stem-Cell Wars – Newsweek.com.

Let’s be clear. Induced pluripotent stem cells are derived from adult cells. Adult cells are cells from a human that is not an embryo. They include virtually any cells, but they DO NOT include stem cells. For example; one of the best sources of skin cells used to generate induced pluripotent stem cells are those skin cells taken from the foreskin of a non-embryo.

Put another way; adult cells (including adult skin cells), as well as the induced pluripotent stem cells that may be generated from adult skin cells are NOT ADULT STEM CELLS.

INDUCED PLURIPOTANT STEM CELLS have problems (suicide triggers) – as detailed in this article.

EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS have problems (they cause tumors, have a proven failure to treat and are immersed in controversy) – as detailed in thousands of articles and trials and studies.

ADULT STEM CELLS on the other hand (also called REPAIR stem cells), have a proven history of safety and efficacy (meaning they work). They do not have suicide triggers, do not generate tumors, they do not have the controversy or failure record. ADULT or REPAIR STEM CELLS have been treating patients around the world for half a decade (40 years if you include stem cell rich bone marrow transplants).

For treatment information: TREATMENT INFO NOW

Final step of pluripotency pinpointed!

In STEM CELLS IN THE NEWS on September 8, 2009 at 1:16 pm

Switching on the power of stem cells

21 August 2009

Scientists have uncovered a vital link in the chain of events that gives stem cells their remarkable properties.

Researchers from the Wellcome Trust Centre for Stem Cell Research at the University of Cambridge have pinpointed the final step in a complex process that gives embryonic stem cells their unique ability to develop into any of the different types of cells in the body (from liver cells to skin cells). Their findings, published today in the journal Cell, have important implications for efforts to harness the power of stem cells for medical applications.

via University of Cambridge.

Flab and freckles could advance stem cell research

In STEM CELLS IN THE NEWS on September 8, 2009 at 12:03 pm

Flab and freckles could advance stem cell research

Alternative tissues shown to yield reprogrammed cells aplenty.

Elie Dolgin

BellyFat cells are more easily turned into iPS cells than fibroblasts.

Fat cells and pigment-producing skin cells can be reprogrammed into stem cells much faster and more efficiently than the skin cells that are usually used — suggesting large bellies and little black moles could provide much-needed material for deriving patient-specific stem cells.

via Flab and freckles could advance stem cell research : Nature News.

%d bloggers like this: