Stem cell therapy

[lukertin]

We know for sure that they can generate any other cell type. The research now is if humans can use them to do exactly what we want.

 

The only way to get evidence of this is through research.

No s***, sherlock. This isn't a discussion about allowing research. It's about a judge denying a child the ability to get treatment via embryonic stem cells. O really

[marharth]

We know for sure that they can generate any other cell type. The research now is if humans can use them to do exactly what we want.

 

The only way to get evidence of this is through research.

No s***, sherlock. This isn't a discussion about allowing research. It's about a judge denying a child the ability to get treatment via embryonic stem cells. O really

That is great and all, but you said "I'm sorry but I'm pretty sure there's still no science supporting the theory that fetal stem cells are capable of doing anything."

 

You are really not in the place right now to be using the sentence "no s***, sherlock." You directly said that there is no scientific evidence that they can do anything, now your going to act like that?

 

The entire reason the child was denied stem cell therapy is due to the ethics of how it is done. Saying that the ethics of therapy and research are not related is pretty ludicrous.

[Marxist ßastard]

The entire reason the child was denied stem cell therapy is due to the ethics of how it is done.

Um, what? It isn't clear to me that

• The parents had a reputable doctor lined up in the States, nor that
• There's an approved stem cell treatment for hypoxic brain damage.

Without both factors, the ethical dilemma here is “Do I let these people take their sick child to a country with inferior healthcare so someone to randomly shove cells from another person into the child's brain?”. Which isn't much of a dilemma.

[marharth]

The entire reason the child was denied stem cell therapy is due to the ethics of how it is done.

Um, what? It isn't clear to me that

• The parents had a reputable doctor lined up in the States, nor that
• There's an approved stem cell treatment for hypoxic brain damage.

Without both factors, the ethical dilemma here is “Do I let these people take their sick child to a country with inferior healthcare so someone to randomly shove cells from another person into the child's brain?”. Which isn't much of a dilemma.

And why wouldn't you want to "shove stem cells into the child's brain?"

[lukertin]

That is great and all, but you said "I'm sorry but I'm pretty sure there's still no science supporting the theory that fetal stem cells are capable of doing anything."

And I stand by my statement. Theory is not a science. It is the fetus of science. Until a theory is experimentally tested it is nothing but a theory and does not qualify as science, much less medicine, under any reasonable definition of the words.

 

You are really not in the place right now to be using the sentence "no s***, sherlock." You directly said that there is no scientific evidence that they can do anything, now your going to act like that?

Yea, I am, because I already made it very clear that I recognize it is theoretically possible but is not backed up by ANY science. Science. You know, things people do in labs, not things people come up with at their desks and wonder if it would work.

 

The entire reason the child was denied stem cell therapy is due to the ethics of how it is done. Saying that the ethics of therapy and research are not related is pretty ludicrous.

That's the entire reason? Really? If you can cite me to one article from a medical journal describing the efficacy of embryonic stem cell treatment I will concede all your arguments.

Edited November 19, 2011 by lukertin

[Marxist ßastard]

And why wouldn't you want to "shove stem cells into the child's brain?"

For the exact same reason I wouldn't chuck in firecrackers, ethylbenzene, tsetse fly larvae, homeopathic sugar pills, or pieces of the True Cross: An unapproved treatment is an unapproved treatment is an unapproved treatment.

 

Until well-controlled clinical trials show the efficacy of stem cell treatment for hypoxic brain damage, such treatment should be denied regardless of any other ethical considerations.

[myrmaad]

And I stand by my statement. Theory is not a science. It is the fetus of science. Until a theory is experimentally tested it is nothing but a theory and does not qualify as science, much less medicine, under any reasonable definition of the words.

 

 

This is a common mistake of the layman. Theory in scientific lexicon has quite a different meaning than the one commonly associated with the word "theory" in the general population.

 

The layman interprets the term "theory" to mean something "untested". In science, if there is one shred non-corroborative evidence, the hypothesis fails and never becomes a theory.

The very nature of science is to rigorously test any hypothesis.

 

http://www.nebscience.org/theory.html

http://www.fsteiger.com/theory.html

[marharth]

That's the entire reason? Really? If you can cite me to one article from a medical journal describing the efficacy of embryonic stem cell treatment I will concede all your arguments.

I think that it is fine if its a last case scenario with approved scientists present. I am not saying that we can efficiently use embryonic stem cells for treatment, I am saying that we should be taking opportunities like these and use them for testing as well. If the parents want to get stem cell treatments done it can be used as a research situation as well. If a court is going to deny younger patients from getting stem cell treatments you are leaving out a huge area that has to be researched.

[Marxist ßastard]

we should be taking opportunities like these and use them for testing as well

I really hope the OP can clarify, but circumstances suggest the parents wanted the child to get an unapproved treatment outside of a clinical study, and they may not have even had a reputable neurosurgeon lined up. That's unconscionable. And it would contribute nothing to scientific study of the treatment's efficacy.

 

Such contribution would only come if the parents enrolled the child in an organized, double-blind clinical study specifically for children with hypoxic brain damage (or properly blocked for that group), with a chance that the child would get a placebo surgery.

 

EDIT: There was a toxicology study of autologous bone marrow stem cells applied to brain damage in March's Neurosurgery. However, its success says nothing about the safety of allogenic cord blood stem cells – they still may pose a risk of tumors or an immune response. I can find three in-progress toxicology studies of allogeneic cord blood stem cells applied to brain damage, but none involve hypoxic brain damage. So the parents likely just wanted to find some guy who would inject stem cells directly into the child's brain, outside of a study. Lovely.

Edited November 19, 2011 by Marxist ßastard

[brokenergy]

That's the entire reason? Really? If you can cite me to one article from a medical journal describing the efficacy of embryonic stem cell treatment I will concede all your arguments.

I think that it is fine if its a last case scenario with approved scientists present. I am not saying that we can efficiently use embryonic stem cells for treatment, I am saying that we should be taking opportunities like these and use them for testing as well. If the parents want to get stem cell treatments done it can be used as a research situation as well. If a court is going to deny younger patients from getting stem cell treatments you are leaving out a huge area that has to be researched.

 

You do know that one of the problems of any stem cell technology is the potential risk of cancer. We need more research into targeted stem cell technology before going into larger clinical trials (not that I'm disagreeing with your main point).

 

Oh and FYI for those who don't know what an "adult" stem cell (correct term is somatic stem cell) is, they are cells that can replicate itself but differentiate into limited types of cells. These include cord blood, bone marrow, brain etc. Their main job is to create cell to replace old cells within your body. Even though that some can be induced back to their pluripotent state (which is basically cord blood), there are unknowns which must be investigated further before use.