Paul Nicholas #39; MS Stem Cell Treatment "GoFundMe" [Donate] ~ Help CHANGE Lives!!!
Help change Paul #39;s life, as well as the lives of others with MS. Video by Eocene Media [E.G.R.] featuring Daleri #39;s "En Route" [Somebody Told Me]. bull;DONATE TO ...
By: Erika G. Rockwell
See original here:
Paul Nicholas' MS Stem Cell Treatment "GoFundMe" [Donate] ~ Help CHANGE Lives!!! - Video
Stem Cell Therapy for Pets - Taylor Before After
Amazing before and after footage of Taylor, a 7 year old dog who received stem cell therapy for arthritis in her hips, knees and ankles. For more information...
By: NewmanVets
Go here to read the rest:
Stem Cell Therapy for Pets - Taylor Before
Stem Cell Therapy Treatment for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy by Dr Alok Sharma, Mumbai, India.
Stem Cell Therapy Treatment for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy by Dr Alok Sharma, Mumbai, India. After Stem Cell Therapy 1) Increased speed in running. 2) Repet...
By: neurogenbsi
View original post here:
Stem Cell Therapy Treatment for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy by Dr Alok Sharma, Mumbai, India. - Video
Stem Cell Treatments for Cerebral Palsy at Stem Cell Institute Panama - Mary Washington #39;s Story
Sarah Washington and her daughter Mary. Mary is 2 years old and was diagnosed with cerebral palsy when she was 4 months old. She was first treated at the Ste...
By: cellmedicine
Excerpt from:
Stem Cell Treatments for Cerebral Palsy at Stem Cell Institute Panama - Mary Washington's Story - Video
Stem Cell Therapy Treatment for Spinal Cord Injury by Dr Alok Sharma, Mumbai, India.
Stem Cell Therapy Treatment for Spinal Cord Injury by Dr Alok Sharma, Mumbai, India. After Stem Cell Therapy 1. During exercises he was able to stand without...
By: neurogenbsi
More:
Stem Cell Therapy Treatment for Spinal Cord Injury by Dr Alok Sharma, Mumbai, India. - Video
Durham, NC (PRWEB) April 16, 2013
Can stem cell therapy outperform a drug commonly considered the gold standard for treating rheumatoid arthritis? A new study in rodents published in the current issue of STEM CELLS Translational Medicine indicates perhaps so.
The findings could lead to a faster, safer, more effective way to bring relief to the up to 70 million people estimated to suffer from this disease worldwide.
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic condition that causes pain, stiffness, swelling and limited motion and function of many joints. While it can affect any joint, RA tends to settle mainly in a patients hands and feet. The results can be debilitating.
People who have RA overproduce a protein called tumor necrosis factor (TNF), which causes the inflammation and damage to the bones, cartilage and tissue. Anti-TNF drugs can block the action of the protein and reduce inflammation. Etanercept (marketed under the trade name Enbrel) is a type of anti-TNF drug called a biologic that for years has been prescribed to treat RA. However, it cant be targeted specifically to the site of the arthritis and, thus, requires higher doses that can cause serious side effects including fatal infections, multiple sclerosis, seizures, heart failure, cancer and more.
Moreover, biologics in general require intense development and manufacturing processes that are challenging for reproducibility, even within the same company. So we wanted to see how delivering treatment through a very targeted system such as that which can be done using stem cells compared to a biologic drug such as Etanercept, said Joseph Mosca, Ph.D. He led the team of researchers from Osiris Therapeutics, Inc. Baltimore, Md., and the Novartis Research, Basel, Switzerland, in conducting the study.
The researchers began by genetically altering human mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in the lab to become vehicles for the cell-based anti-TNF delivery. They then injected the cells into mice that had been induced with RA and monitored them over a seven-day period, then compared the results to a group of animals treated with Etanercept. The results showed that the anti-TNF therapy delivered by stem cells reversed or attenuated the arthritis inflammation on par with the Etanercept except that it did it faster.
If this translates into fewer side-effects and/or lower compliance remains to be seen, Dr. Mosca said. In either case, these results illustrate the ability of stem cells to deliver proteins of therapeutic value and demonstrate their potential clinical utility in rheumatoid/osteoarthritis and other TNF-related diseases where anti-TNF biologic drugs have already shown promise.
The authors have shown the feasibility of a targeted approach to treatment using cells that are known to home to damaged tissue, said Anthony Atala, M.D., Editor of STEM CELLS Translational Medicine and director of the Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine. The manuscript supports and demonstrates the potential of mesenchymal stem cells as a vehicle for cell-based gene delivery.
### The full article, Comparison of Drug and Cell-Based DeliveryEngineered Adult Mesenchymal Stem Cells Expressing Soluble Tumor Necrosis Factor Receptor-II Prevent Arthritis in Mouse and Rat Animal Models, can be accessed at http://www.stemcellstm.com.
Read this article:
Stem Cells Might Beat Drugs in Delivering Relief Faster, More Effectively to Rheumatoid Arthritis Sufferers
Experts to shed light on promising, but not quite proven, stem cell treatments as ASAPS Annual Meeting
New York, NY (PRWEB) April 15, 2013
There is a lot of marketing hype about the role of stem cells in aesthetic procedures, said Dr. Singer of La Jolla, CA. We are hopeful that this is the next frontier, but, unfortunately, there is no current scientific evidence that stem cells improve aesthetic outcomes.
This panel is critical because stem cells is such a hot term, used to market everything from surgical procedures to over-the-counter facial creams, added Dr. Hijjawi of Milwaukee, WI. As ASAPS members, we are concerned about all of the amazing claims being made about stem cells, and about finding out what the truth behind the claims really is.
Research is currently ongoing to define the potential role of stem cells in aesthetic surgery, particularly for stem cells derived from the fat tissue. Each of the presenters on the panel is actively engaged in clinical or basic science research looking at stem cell therapy, including its impact on fat grafting outcomes in aesthetic surgery. Fat grafting has been used for many years to enhance contour and shape in the face, breasts, and hands, and research continues to uncover therapeutic possibilities. However, it is unclear if methods to add additional stem cells to the transplanted fat tissue produce better results than fat grafting alone.
Although stem cells have great promise in tissue generation as seen in animal studies, plastic surgeons continue to struggle with demonstrating their role in aesthetic medicine, added Dr. Del Vecchio of Boston, MA.
In the decade since the discovery of abundant stem cells in the fat tissue, many physicians have begun to rebrand their procedures using the words stem cell for marketing purposes. Unfortunately, there are no published studies showing that stem cell-enriched fat has any effect on fat transplantation outcomes.
In our previously unwanted fat lies a vast store of our own bodys stem cells, which we may be able to use to treat many conditions in the near future, said Dr. Coleman of New York, NY. However, the amazing potential of stem cells must be measured through honest scientific studies, rather than through less-than-honest marketing ploys.
"As the field evolves, we need to take a thoughtful approach to collecting data that justifies stem cell treatments in each specific application, and a realistic and rational approach to how these treatments are presented to patients," added Dr. Rubin of Pittsburgh, PA.
###
See the rest here:
Do Stem Cell Claims in Aesthetic Surgery Hold Up?
Peggy Noonan and Bill Hemmer Share Thoughts on Vatican-Hosted Conference Rome, April 15, 2013 (Zenit.org) Ann Schneible | 346 hits
Adult stem cell research has advanced further than many people realize, according to journalists Peggy Noonan and Bill Hemmer, both panelists at the Second International Vatican Stem Cell Conference.
The three-day conference, which concluded Saturday, explored advancements made in the field of adult stem cell research and therapies, and included interventions from experts in the fields of science, medicine, bioethics, politics and journalism.
From the beginning, the Catholic Church has condemned the destruction of embryos for the purpose of research, but has been a supporter of research using adult stem cells.
Peggy Noonan, columnist for the Wall Street Journal, moderated a panel that focused on the political landscape of stem cell research and funding.
It was noted during the panel discussion how the stem cell debate was much more heated in the United States. Explaining the reason for this difference, Noonan told ZENIT, "We are still used to grappling with great political issues from a moral standpoint. It is almost our habit as a nation, for 250 years now. In Europe, this has grown less of a habit. Europe has grown more pragmatic, perhaps."
She noted how the extent to which adult stem cell research and treatment have advanced, moreover, "takes the pressure at least in the States, perhaps off this grinding argument over embryonic stem cells."
"I am impressed to find out so much is going on in the adult stem cell area," Noonan continued, saying she had not been "so aware of the scientific progress being made in the area of adult stem cell research."
"More is happening in the field of medicine than you know," she said.
Fox News anchor Bill Hemmer, who was also one of the moderators during Friday's session of the conference, expressed his enthusiasm for what stem cell research could mean for the future of medicine.
You are here: Popular Issues >> Pros And Cons Of Stem Cell Research
Pros and Cons of Stem Cell Research - What are Stem Cells? There has been much controversy in the press recently about the pros and cons of stem cell research. What is the controversy all about? "Stem" cells can be contrasted with "differentiated" cells. They offer much hope for medical advancement because of their ability to grow into almost any kind of cell. For instance, neural cells in the brain and spinal cord that have been damaged can be replaced by stem cells. In the treatment of cancer, cells destroyed by radiation or chemotherapy can be replaced with new healthy stem cells that adapt to the affected area, whether it be part of the brain, heart, liver, lungs, or wherever. Dead cells of almost any kind, no matter the type of injury or disease, can be replaced with new healthy cells thanks to the amazing flexibility of stem cells. As a result, billions of dollars are being poured into this new field.
Pros and Cons of Stem Cell Research - Where Do They Come From? To understand the pros and cons of stem cell research, one must first understand where stem cells come from. There are three main sources for obtaining stem cells - adult cells, cord cells, and embryonic cells. Adult stem cells can be extracted either from bone marrow or from the peripheral system. Bone marrow is a rich source of stem cells. However, some painful destruction of the bone marrow results from this procedure. Peripheral stem cells can be extracted without damage to bones, but the process takes more time. And with health issues, time is often of the essence. Although difficult to extract, since they are taken from the patient's own body, adult stem cells are superior to both umbilical cord and embryonic stem cells. They are plentiful. There is always an exact DNA match so the body's immune system never rejects them. And as we might expect, results have been both profound and promising.
Stem cells taken from the umbilical cord are a second very rich source of stem cells. Umbilical cells can also offer a perfect match where a family has planned ahead. Cord cells are extracted during pregnancy and stored in cryogenic cell banks as a type of insurance policy for future use on behalf of the newborn. Cord cells can also be used by the mother, the father or others. The more distant the relationship, the more likely it is that the cells will be rejected by the immune system's antibodies. However, there are a number of common cell types just as there are common blood types so matching is always possible especially where there are numerous donors. The donation and storage process is similar to blood banking. Donation of umbilical cells is highly encouraged. Compared to adult cells and embryonic cells, the umbilical cord is by far the richest source of stem cells, and cells can be stored up in advance so they are available when needed. Further, even where there is not an exact DNA match between donor and recipient, scientists have developed methods to increase transferability and reduce risk.
Pros and Cons of Stem Cell Research - Embryonic Cells The pros and cons of stem cell research come to the surface when we examine the third source of stem cells - embryonic cells. Embryonic stem cells are extracted directly from an embryo before the embryo's cells begin to differentiate. At this stage the embryo is referred to as a "blastocyst." There are about 100 cells in a blastocyst, a very large percentage of which are stem cells, which can be kept alive indefinitely, grown in cultures, where the stem cells continue to double in number every 2-3 days. A replicating set of stem cells from a single blastocyst is called a "stem cell line" because the genetic material all comes from the same fertilized human egg that started it. President Bush authorized federal funding for research on the 15 stem cell lines available in August 2001. Other stem cell lines are also available for research but without the coveted assistance of federal funding.
So what is the controversy all about? Those who value human life from the point of conception, oppose embryonic stem cell research because the extraction of stem cells from this type of an embryo requires its destruction. In other words, it requires that a human life be killed. Some believe this to be the same as murder. Against this, embryonic research advocates argue that the tiny blastocyst has no human features. Further, new stem cell lines already exist due to the common practice of in vitro fertilization. Research advocates conclude that many fertilized human cells have already been banked, but are not being made available for research. Advocates of embryonic stem cell research claim new human lives will not be created for the sole purpose of experimentation.
Others argue against such research on medical grounds. Mice treated for Parkinson's with embryonic stem cells have died from brain tumors in as much as 20% of cases.1 Embryonic stem cells stored over time have been shown to create the type of chromosomal anomalies that create cancer cells.2 Looking at it from a more pragmatic standpoint, funds devoted to embryonic stem cell research are funds being taken away from the other two more promising and less controversial types of stem cell research mentioned above.
Learn More Now!
Footnotes 1 The Real Promise of Stem Cell Research Dr. David Prentice, HealthNewsDigest.com 2 Derivation of Human Stem-Cell Lines from Human Blastocysts, C. A. Cowan and others. March 25, 2004, New England Journal of Medicine, p.1355 with secondary reference to footnotes 13-17 p.1356.
Like this information? Help us by sharing it with others using the social media buttons below. What is this?
See the original post here:
Pros And Cons Of Stem Cell Research
Ready for a story in which the part about stem cell research is the least complicated thing happening? The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia today upheld a lower courts decision to toss out a lawsuit that would have prevented the federal government from funding research on embryonic stem cells. The long and the short of that? Federal research dollars from the National Institutes of Health can fund research on embyronic stell cells.
Todays decision puts the Obama administration on the side of the angels on this issue, legally speaking. Shortly after Obamas inauguration, the administration overturned a longstanding restriction on federal funding for stem cell research put in place by George W. Bush in 2001. Lawsuits trying to restrict the funding once more under a provision of the 1996 Dickey-Wicker amendment, which precludes taxpayer funding for research that harms an embryo were filed in short order. Today, it appears those efforts have ended fruitlessly.
Its the second time the three-judge panel has upheld the ruling on the grounds that harvesting stem cells does not harm a viable embryo, and should put the matter to rest permenanently or at least until a new administration rolls into the White House. The judges in the case, it seems, are already tired of hearing the same arguments, with Judge David Sentelle stating thatunless [the plaintiffs] have established some extraordinary circumstance, the law of the case is established and we will not revisit the issue. You can read the courts decision here if you think it will make any sense to you.
This is great news for the field of stem cell research, which could provide cures to a variety of ailments too far-ranging to list here. It is also great news for people who believe that scientific and research funding should be a priority, and one not to be mucked about with by politicians. It is great news for people who like things that could cure cancer. We count ourselves in this last category, because cancer is a dick. It is less great news for people who are against embryonic stem cell research, but hey, not everyone can be a winner, right?
Weve covered the ongoing study of induced pluripotent stem cells here before. IPS cells, which are derived from adult cells reverted back to an embryonic state by genetic tinkering, are great. Just terrific. Cant say enough good things about them. They also come with their own set of risks and drawbacks, from being hard to produce to containing unwanted mutations.
Embryonic stem cells are easier to work with, as they havent been manipulated into behaving like something they really arent, like IPS cells. They also have more promise when it comes to treating maladies like blindness. While embryonic stem cells are harvested from fertilized egg cells created in vitro, those embryos are never destined for implantation these are lumps of cellular tissue that are bound to become bio-waste, not babies. So yes, we could throw them out. Or we could use them for making medicine, curing illness, and saving lives instead. I mean, both are good options, really.
(via The Washington Posto)
Relevant to your interests
Read this article:
Circuit Court OKs Funding of Embryonic Stem Cell Research ...