One has to wonder at what the future might hold for medicine with the advent of stem cell therapy. I was listening to the talking heads one morning about stem cells and suddenly realized I know almost nothing about them. What I do know is that they are completely transposable and could conceivably become any cell in the human body. I would like to avoid the usual political debate and focus on the scientific advances of stem cell research, it's applications and it's future as regenerative medicine. I found this report and thought it might make a good primer for the debate:

"This report features chapters written by experts in several areas of enormous potential for regenerative
medicine. Drs. Junying Yu and James A. Thomson explain the basic features of embryonic stem cells, how
they are being used in research, and how they may lead to human therapies

Regenerative Medicine 2006

I have no agenda here except to become better informed and educated on the science involved. I am skeptical of some of the claims scientists are making but willing to be convinced that stem cell research will advance medical science by leaps and bounds.

Question for debate:

Is the potential of stem cell research exaggerated or can modern science make good on the promise of unlocking the mystery of these molecular mechanisms?

The quick answer is that it is too early to tell. Research into the possible clinical applications of human embryonic stem cells is in its infancy.

Here's a good site for information



I think that there is an enormous potential for research using human embryonic stem cells. If nothing else, learning more about how undifferentiated cells develop into specialized cells will contribute enormously to our knowledge of human biology. It seems very likely that such knowledge could be applied clinically.

There is a famous anecdote told about the great British scientist Michael Faraday.

BBC Biography of Michael Faraday

Modern science has a fine habit of surprising us (in my opinion at least). I have to think that the potential outcome of stem cell research shall be beneficial for every person ever put into a situation where researchers currently feel that stem cells would regenerate and stimulate growth and restore them to 'normal.' The potential for good is too great to ignore. The only exaggeration when it comes to stem cell research at all is people saying we do not know enough about it to sink a fair amount of money into it. Research is not a cheap art. Bottom line: Whether they can or cannot remains to be seen but the overwhelming body of scientific opinion says they can deliver.

From what I am reading stem cells have been used for various treatments, successfully for some time. Bone marrow transplant used for leukemia, other cancers and certain blood disorders. The leukocytes (white blood cells) become abnormal so they can't fight off infection and interfere with the normal functions of the organ. Chemotheorpy targets the abnormal leukyocytes and providing a suitable donor is found the adult stem cells can be introduced and grow healthy white blood cells. I am under the impression that this treatment has been around for some time and I think we have all heard of leukemia patients looking for a suitable donor, now you know why.

There are other stem cells, for instance, peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) can be extracted from blood but the stem cells are no where near as plentiful. Umbilical cords are rich with stem cells and they have one major advantage, the cells have not developed so the recipient's immune system won't attack them. Also, the cells are not well developed so they in turn won't attack the recipient's body.

In 1998 blastocyst embryonic stem cells were cultured and these held the promise of becoming any cell in the human body. When the report linked in the opening post was first published apparently research into embryonic stem cells was still receiving federal funding. As I recall when Bush vetoed the funding bill he said that most therapys were from adult stem cells. Currently I am wondering if this was just a profound ignorance on his part regarding the potential of these cells or perhaps a misguided prolife agenda.

At any rate, embryonic stem cells could be used in the treatment of Parkinsons disease. This is a vicious genetic disorder the attacks the central nervous system. Conceivably these stem cells could be used to repair the damage that is having such a profoundly deleterious effect. I know this, if I were suffering from Parkinson's disease I don't think I would want to wait and see how these therapys may or may not work.

That's where I'm at with this, I'm still looking into research into embryonic stem cell therapy and I am far from convinced one way or the other. One thing is clear, this is an important area of research it only makes sense to take it seriously and become better educated on the science involved.

Not to drag the debate off topic but one could simply ask what was medicine like just fifty years ago.

The ethical problem aside, nothing in medicine comes easy as i understand it, as far as knowledge goes really. The place I am trying to make this go is the simple idea that one of the areas of stem cell research that can really be of use is the idea that when it actually gets going the need to "harvest" stem cells will go away as we understand it currently, just for the particular aspect of it. More often then not I think this is drowned out many times, my only reason to reference it. Then the flip side of this currently infant stage science is that it could as already put advance medicine by leaps and bounds, and for what that means could simply be some damage to a persons spine from repetitive work may not have to get worse in time or even stay that way, to of course far larger applications.

You have to understand though, that to really be able to work with this does require a rather immense amount of intelligence on the subject. I cant personally and I doubt many can just generally outline developmentally our biology, and this is primarily what this works with. Now I don’t know exactly what stem cell could do for various genetic based illness, but for various other maybe non germ line problems medically it could basically be able to take the place for damaged tissue. Maybe burn patients will not have to live life like that, again its limits are not known because again the science of it is not known, it exists in an x state of affairs currently, and during this its understandably but probably not understood that its put under enormous demands for instant returns to satisfy a great many demands by various groups of thought on it.

If we put such a lid on medicine in general dentists would still probably put patients under with a hammer before pulling a tooth, I know its not an excuse for medicine to do whatever, but I really doubt people truly ever hold up to light the trials medicine and medical science has to go through just to give us a better standard of living and health. On this note though progression will come faster now then fifty years ago because we are simply not as primitive in regards to understanding and technology overall.

Is the potential of stem cell research exaggerated or can modern science make good on the promise of unlocking the mystery of these molecular mechanisms?

There is a lot of confusion about just what stem cells are and the different uses to which they can be put.

The moral/ethical debate revolves around embryonic stem cells. The development of ESC lines results in the destruction of an otherwise viable embryo.

Adult stem cell research (which is being used in quite a number of applications already, such as the leukemia and bone marrow treatments discussed by phaedrus) does not pose these ethical questions, since these cells may be extracted and developed without destroying life. Also umbilical cord stem cells are very promising and also offer no ethical dilemmas.

Now, ethics aside, embryonic stem cell research (ESCR) could be the Prometheus modern medicine has been looking for. Undifferentiated stem cells, as found in embryos, if properly cultivated, may (and I stress, may) lead to miraculous cures for Parkinson's, type I diabetes, strokes, burns, nerve damage, and other types of diseases and injuries that we cannot effectively treat today.

Today, the problem with ESCs lies in scientists' limited understanding of what, exactly, triggers "differentiation"--the process where the stem cell transforms into the desired specialized cell (brain cell, kidney cell, T cell etc.). It is believed that the presence of certain hormones and other chemicals causes this differentiation process. The trick is in creating the right environment for proper growth and then controlling that growth. Otherwise, tumors could develop. This is currently a huge hurdle for some types of specialized cells (such as the pancreatic T cells that produce insulin).

The other hurdle with ESC therapy is the same with any other transplant process: immune system rejection of the introduced cells.

The process commonly called a "bone marrow transplant" is in reality a stem cell transplant (Hematopoietic stem cells). It has been used for decades.

FAQ on stem cells

Some scientists have broken company with those that believe that stem cells will directly cure disease. They see stem cells as an opportunity to study how the body functions and thus how we can correct these disease conditions: Some Scientists See Shift in Stem Cell Hopes

It's a complicated picture and stem cell research is certainly not guaranteed to solve some of these pressing disease issues.

In theory stem cells will be able to replace any deformation or malfunctioning part of the body. I believe this type of technology will take a very long time to yeild it's full potential, maybe not even in my lifetime. So far we have discovered the easy part, that they exist and have just begun to manipulate them.

This spills over into many ethical questions rather than just the one focusing around embryonic stem cells because of the potential.



In theory, and it's only a matter of time before the "programming" is mapped out , you could adapt humans to specialized tasks or even change the appearance of organs. You could even make them more efficient. This also leaks over into bionics and cloning.

There's already been the successful communication of a human brain to computers.

http://www.pbs.org/saf/1107/segments/1107-5.htm



Basically he can turn the boat in the direction he would like just by thinking about it. This shows that the human brain uses electrical impulses that can be on the same wavelength that we use to operate electronics.

The potential of stem cells is still not yet fully known though in theory combined with other technologies you could build a bionic person. It's potential cannot be exaggerated in my opinion but I doubt any major gains will come very soon because we have just discovered the iceburg floating on the water and %87 of an iceburg is underwater.

With great potential for good always comes great potential for harm, this technology can be very dangerous water to tread into especially in the long run.

Edited to add :

I just wanted to expand on the reference to "programming". Amlord has allready explained the problem they are having now in which you could consider it esentially programming the cell for a specific function.



It's only a matter of time before scientists discover exactly what chemicals are introduced that makeup each type of cell. This could take a very long time or a short amount of time... either way it's only a matter of time wether it be ten or a hundred years. The modern day computer took thousands of years to invite. Every discovery leads to another that effects another one that effects another one and I believe stem cells are just the beggining of a long line of eventual discoveries.

Im curious as to what controls the makeup of each cell because there obviously has to be a control to coordinate the billions of different structures that makeup a human body. With that information you would be getting into god complexes.

They have cultured neural stem cells from the central nervous system (CNS) of different mammals at different stages of development and can become neurons, astrocytes and oligodendrocytes. They can also be derived from embryonic stem cells since they can become any of the three germ layers of the embryo;endoderm, mesoderm and ectoderm. However, CNS stem cells also populate adult human brains (see Neural stem cells and neurospheres--re-evaluating the relationship. Nature 2005 ) which opens the possibility of regeneration that doesn't involve embryos. This opens up the possibility of treatment for dread diseases such as Parkinson's disease (PD), Huntington's disease, multiple sclerosis...etc. Large numbers of stem cells can be generated in culture and that could get around a lot of the technical and ethical limitations of embryonic neural tissue transplant strategies. Application of these requires a better understanding of regulators of stem cell proliferation and factors determining differentiation. So far, the studies that tried to graft neural stem cells have not been successful.

Recent advances in stem cell neurobiology.

Bear in mind stem cell therapy only has the potential to grow cells, there is no way stem cells will ever cure the diseases it may be used to treat. There is no miracle cure in stem cells just an exciting possibility of regenerating damaged cells, even neural cells are within the range of possibility. The dogma of most of the last century that neural cells can not be regenerated has been disproved by the discovery and isolation of bona fide neural stem cells in the mammalian brain.

Like everyone else I am excited by the possibilities but so far adult stem cell treatments have been proven while neural and embryonic stem cells are still in the experimental stage. I don't know exactly how much progress is being made in culturing stem cells so I expect I will need to keep looking. I think we do well to remember that the possibilities will far outnumber the realities of stem cell therapy but with all these possibilites it's hard not to let your imagination run wild.

Yet another stem cell therapy that does not involve embryos:

Cell Transplants Restore Vision in Mice