What is Digg?95 Comments
- Medicamusic, on 10/28/2008, -2/+39"How long was I in there?"
"About five minutes."
"Why are we not funding this?!" - l0tharnt, on 09/26/2008, -2/+33Er "Last-Stem" is bothering the hell out of me on the title
- Phalanxia, on 09/26/2008, -0/+26Dugg for victory for the 21st century.
- edwinjose, on 09/26/2008, -1/+18Go Science!
- WhiskeyLemur, on 06/30/2009, -6/+20Read my comment below. The embryos used for stem cell extraction were headed for the trashcan, not for a life as a human being.
- justinil, on 09/26/2008, -1/+14So... when do I get Electrobolt and Telekinesis?
- jac13226, on 09/26/2008, -1/+14very interesting. just a week or two ago we were studying stem cells in my biology class and the virus that implants itself in the cell DNA, which may cause cancer in the future. that was pretty much the last hurdle to jump which this adult stem cell research, so hopefully researchers will be able to disregard embryonic stem cells entirely so we can move forward with this research with no ethical questions whatsoever.
- Narcism, on 09/26/2008, -1/+13A hyphen is not an em dash... :( (in reference to the title)
- socalftw, on 09/26/2008, -3/+14Zombie Outbreak...
- WhiskeyLemur, on 06/30/2009, -8/+19To be entirely rational - and I realize that this debate has been anything but - embryonic stem cells are *not* obtained from embryos which would ever have developed into human beings. The majority of them come from frozen "extra" embryos created by IVF (in-vitro fretilization) clinics - implanted embryos have a fairly high miscarriage rate, so clinics make extras just in case. The unused embryos are discarded if they're not used for stem cell research. If you really think that tossing a cluster of fertilized human cells into a bio-hazard trashcan is somehow morally superior to using it to advance science and medicine, I really don't know what to tell you.
Sources (to name just a few):
http://www.physorg.com/news121446759.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/5272648.stm
http://health.usnews.com/usnews/health/healthday/0 ...
If it weren't for the religious right, science could be focusing on actually *studying* this amazingly versatile cell, instead of trying to find half-assed workarounds which create their own subset of problems. This so-called "controversy" is setting back research by years, if not decades. - Brian48216, on 09/26/2008, -14/+23So if this is identical to the stem cells that make up an embryo of maybe 32 cells-
What's the difference?
Damn right wingers making so much noise for such a useless reason.
Many people lost precious time waiting for a treatment for their condition. - inactive, on 09/26/2008, -4/+12Well, it's still better than the millions of babies I kill every time I jack off.
- SeVeRyourTies, on 09/26/2008, -2/+10You mean I can make my OWN Shakeys Pizza?
- Reynardine, on 09/26/2008, -0/+8Adult stem cells are *not* embryonic stem cells. Adult stem cells replenish the cell types in the human body.
E.g. each division of a circulatory stem cell gives rise to millions of white blood cells, red blood cells, platelets, bone marrow, etc. One adult stem cell type per "branch" of cells. An embryonic stem cell is even *less* differentiated than an adult stem cell and can form cells from all the branches.
Since cancer *is a disease of stem cells*, the ability to replenish a person's stem cells after killing, say, ALL the bone marrow cells to rid a person of leukemia could easily save lives. No finesse needed, just a way to grow a ***kton of cells quickly and put them back in the human body. - SisyphusFragmnt, on 09/26/2008, -0/+7You? Never. Me? Next week..
- DivisibleByZero, on 09/26/2008, -14/+21The difference is that you didn't have to kill anybody to get these?
- geogeer, on 09/26/2008, -1/+7Actually I believe that those on the right were against embryonic stem cell research, they haven't had any problem with adult stem cell research.
- DivisibleByZero, on 09/26/2008, -0/+6Yeah, just put all the stem cells next to a Shakeys Pizza
- Jsmuli2, on 09/26/2008, -0/+5I know a dude who looks like Ving Rhames, you think I'll be alright?
- bstew22, on 09/26/2008, -0/+5word.
- DivisibleByZero, on 09/26/2008, -1/+6FTFA: "researchers announced one of the most promising methods yet for creating ethically neutral stem cells: reprogramming adult human cells to act like embryonic stem cells"
Sounds like they're claiming these things do the same as embryonic stem sells. If the article and I are incorrect in interpreting that, please enlighten us as to the differences. What can you get from "traditional" embryonic stem cells that you can't get from these (aside from a manufactured argument in favor of abortion)? - SisyphusFragmnt, on 09/26/2008, -0/+4The meme has died, let the grieving process begin, dammit!
- drh8, on 09/27/2008, -0/+4Your strawman method would be the most expensive and overcomplicated way imaginable. It probably wouldn't even work. The method used results in a large supply of unfertilized eggs (keyword unfertilized) that are either thrown in the trash, donated to those who can't give birth (if the donor allows) or used for experiments.
- grizzlybrice, on 09/26/2008, -0/+4Bring it!
- ashfish, on 09/26/2008, -4/+8Well when we still have to cross the hurdle of pharmacists denying to refill birth control prescriptions because of moral reasons. Hopefully this will open up more eyes to the wonders of science and that it isn't some icky thing hell bent on destroying god and babies.
- angelslay, on 09/26/2008, -1/+5Although I support this kind of research, I honestly do not believe these cells can replace embryonic stem cells. As mentioned, unlike the lentivirus which incorporates itself into the cell's genome, the adenovirus, as used in this study, expresses its gene as a separate entity. This poses several problems, as the cell divides, the virus' plasmid gets diluted with each round of division. This has the potential to reverse the effects produced over time. In addition, there has been a lot of concerns of using viruses in gene therapy, as there was a death some years ago during human clinical trials. Although I don't believe the use of viruses are as much of a concern as some have stated. I'll have to take a look at the actual journal article before I will make any final judgments. It is disappointing to see that we can be working directly with embryonic stem cells right now, but with religion fused in our politics, science and medicine is being stalled so that we can find workarounds to it . However, if this technology is for real, and can be used practically in the future, it may be even better than using embryonic stem cells from a different source, because it will be our cells. Skeptical, but hopeful.
- SeekerDarksteel, on 09/26/2008, -0/+3Which is begging the question of whether we should be creating and destroying thousands of human embryos in the first place, regardless of whether they are being used for fertility or stem cell research. People who argue against stem cell research also argue against IVF because it results in the creation and destruction of embryos.
(The answer may be yes, it is acceptable, but if you want to have a rational argument, then you have to argue that it is acceptable, not presume that it is acceptable OR make a plea about how many lives should be saved. Otherwise you're just as irrational as the people who claim that it should be illegal because god said so). - musikmann, on 09/27/2008, -0/+3Well several points could be made, but most importantly, you assume (incorrectly) that the information gained from the work on real ES cells didn't contribute to the generation of these iPS cells.
- walkerboah, on 09/26/2008, -0/+3There are lots of adult stem cell projects out there. They're the only ones that show hope with out tumors or major side effects so far. They harvest specific stem cells from points on your body and convert those for use. Such as thigh muscle stem cells for heart repair. I head of 5 cases of this helping people with less then a 40% functioning heart, repair the damaged areas. Bringing their heart up to above 90% functionality. More funding is needed for this research and its a shame that it gets mixed up with the politics of the embryonic stem cell research.
- DiscoLando, on 09/26/2008, -2/+5Many Bothans died to bring us this information.
- flarn2006, on 09/27/2008, -0/+3- ≠ —
- bassoon179, on 09/27/2008, -0/+3Yes the Shinya Yakanama lab in Japan was one of the first labs to create iPS cells (induced pluripotent stem cells). This was not faked. Please get your facts straight. The above poster is confusing the Korean researcher with the Japanese lab. Korean researcher Woo Suk Hwang claimed in 2004 to have created a human embryonic stem cell line using a technique called somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT). But Hwang was lying. They were two totally different projects.
The Japanese lab had real results that were replicated by labs at Harvard and the University of Wisconsin. However, the Japanese lab used retroviruses to achieve this which insert themselves into the genome. The problem is you run the risk of insertional mutagenesis which could lead to a cancer like disease. Insertional mutagenesis caused by retroviruses have been a problem in actual human gene therapy trials such as the X-SCID trials (France and Britain) and the CGD gene therapy trials in German. Some of the children in the X-SCID trial developed cancer from viral induced insertional mutagenesis.
So this is a breakthrough because the virus used to introduce the transcription factors to transform the cells into iPS cells does not integrate into the host genome. Sadly, this new process is very inefficient but promising. - wifirewire2, on 09/26/2008, -1/+4Sweet... food crisis solved.
- ashfish, on 09/26/2008, -0/+3They are going to be comparing these new stem cells to embryonic stem cells to see if they match up.
FTA: "Hochedlinger and his colleagues are now working to increase the efficiency of their adenovirus technique and to repeat their methods to create human iPS cells. "Once we do that," Hochedlinger says, "we can figure out whether [embryonic stem] cells and unmodified iPS cells are really identical to each other or not. I don't know the answer yet."" - MrTankJump, on 09/26/2008, -3/+6The word "adenovirus" and the fact that stem-cells are a miracle cure reminds me of I Am Legend.
- Jashobeam5, on 09/26/2008, -1/+4Dugg for Snowflake mention, but the "radical right" was not needed and incorrect.
- SisyphusFragmnt, on 09/26/2008, -13/+16A lot of people died so that Bush could look righteous to people who are stupid enough to think the Earth is 6000 years old..
- munerf, on 09/26/2008, -0/+3There are horrible neurological diseases like Huntington's with no treatment. I really hope stem cells help everyone with all these messed up diseases
- datastorageguy, on 09/26/2008, -2/+5You don't really have a firm grasp as to what the proposal is for this "bailout" do you?
- SilverBlade2k, on 09/26/2008, -0/+3Nice!
Can't wait for this to be used in hospitals to fully replace limbs.. - farfromok, on 09/26/2008, -2/+4The "uneducated idiots" argument was that the ends don't justify the means. It was the right argument and this work-around is fantastic news. It is a pity so much time and effort went into justifying embryonic stem cell research when this solution was clearly being pursued and must have been, in fact, very close. Now we don't have to 'farm' human beings, phew...
- coheedcollapse, on 09/27/2008, -0/+2You didn't notice the fact that I said that the uneducated idiots would be the ones still complaining, did you?
- jaxter2010, on 06/17/2009, -5/+7Maybe you should have gone out and made noise FOR stem cell research.
Right wingers are more passionately against stem cell research than left wingers are for stem cell research, which is why stem cell research has been held up. - mashw, on 09/26/2008, -0/+2"Unbiased opinion"?
- fredJdukes, on 09/26/2008, -1/+3I see what you did there.
- salter84, on 09/26/2008, -0/+2hoooray stem cells for everyone !
- Qxzkjp, on 09/27/2008, -0/+2DivisibleByZero: Yes, they are, and yes, it would. At least, that's the best guess according to latest medical findings.
- scoot2006, on 09/26/2008, -1/+3—
- DivisibleByZero, on 09/26/2008, -0/+2Well said, SeekerDarksteel. I'm sort-of against IVF, but think it could survive with some modifications. Current practice is to basically make a ton of embryos and use them in smaller batches, so that the later batches don't ever get used (and eventually end up in a trash can) if the earlier ones are successful. Would be better to just make smaller batches, and make multiple batches if you have to.
- dynamojoe, on 09/26/2008, -0/+2Yeah, actually, I do. It's a lot of money being loaned or given to a bunch of organizations that engaged in stupidly risky behavior and are now collectively getting their asses burned by it.
If you prefer to cure the market rather than cure cancer, that's your call. It's not mine. -
Show 51 - 98 of 98 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is