Embryonic Stem Cells Hold Possible Cure For Diabetes

[jillian]

Diabetes-related deaths are at epidemic proportions, but the radical right would rather let people die than use some cells which are never going to be brought to term.

"The incidence of diabetes has been increasing at an alarming rate in this country over the past decade," adds Dr. Alderman. "Diabetes itself is an important cause of death. But in addition, people with diabetes are likely to succumb to heart disease and heart attacks. So we wanted to determine how the upsurge in diabetes is affecting the number of hospitalizations and deaths in New York, a city with a large and diverse population."

The Einstein researchers looked at New York City Department of Health mortality records for two three-year periods--1989 through 1991 and 1999 through 2001. This information included the underlying cause of death listed on each individual's death certificate. The data on hospitalizations during the same periods were provided by the New York State Department of Health. The analyses were limited to people 35 years and older.

During the decade between these two three-year time spans, mortality rates due to stroke, cancer and all other diseases declined--with the notable exception of diabetes. The mortality rate due to diabetes over that period increased by 61 percent.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=38545

And now for the real science on the subject .....

Recent research has also provided more evidence that human embryonic cells can develop into cells that can and do produce insulin. Last year, Melton, Nissim Benvinisty of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, and Josef Itskovitz-Eldor of the Technion in Haifa, Israel, reported that human embryonic stem cells could be manipulated in culture to express the PDX-1 gene, a gene that controls insulin transcription [16]. In these experiments, researchers cultured human embryonic stem cells and allowed them to spontaneously form embryoid bodies (clumps of embryonic stem cells composed of many types of cells from all three germ layers). The embryoid bodies were then treated with various growth factors, including nerve growth factor. The researchers found that both untreated embryoid bodies and those treated with nerve growth factor expressed PDX-1. Embryonic stem cells prior to formation of the aggregated embryoid bodies did not express PDX-1. Because expression of the PDX-1 gene is associated with the formation of beta islet cells, these results suggest that beta islet cells may be one of the cell types that spontaneously differentiate in the embryoid bodies. The researchers now think that nerve growth factor may be one of the key signals for inducing the differentiation of beta islet cells and can be exploited to direct differentiation in the laboratory. Complementing these findings is work done by Jon Odorico of the University of Wisconsin in Madison using human embryonic cells of the same source. In preliminary findings, he has shown that human embryonic stem cells can differentiate and express the insulin gene [12].

http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/scireport/chapter7.asp

 

[Gunny]

Diabetes-related deaths are at epidemic proportions, but the radical right would rather let people die than use some cells which are never going to be brought to term.



http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=38545

And now for the real science on the subject .....



http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/scireport/chapter7.asp

Promises, promises, promises ....:blah2:

Your factual evidence that embryonic stem cells hold a cure for diabetes? The same factual evidence that proves used motor oil holds a cure for diabetes.

Nothing more than an appeal to emotionalism with no actual basis in fact. And if any opinion or belief is radical, it would be the one on display in your little attempt at emotional manipulation to force your wishful thinking on everyone else.

 

[Adam's Apple]

This is from a scientist who works in stem cell research.

Adult Stem Cell Research Breakthrough Produces Insulin for Diabetics
by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor
July 10, 2006

Dublin, Ireland (LifeNews.com) -- A scientist in Ireland has made a major breakthrough in the field of adult stem cell research by producing insulin needed by diabetic patients from the stem cells from the umbilical cords of living babies. The result provides real hope for diabetics because the insulin from embryonic stem cells doesn't work as effectively and involves the destruction of human life.

Colin McGuckin, professor of regenerative medicine at the University of Newcastle, will soon present the findings to Catholic church leaders at a presentation at the Augustinian Institute in Rome.

“We have been able to produce insulin-secreting cells from cord blood, which is pretty much a first,” McGuckin told the London Times.

McGuckin said that insulin produced from adult stem cells will be more effective for those with diabetes.

“Although people have been able to do it from embryonic stem cells, they are not transplantable because they don't have a tissue match for the patient. Cord blood gives a big advantage,” he explained.

McGuckin also told the Times that the process is so effective that embryonic stem cells are not needed altogether.

“We are able to produce many different tissues from cord blood stem cells so we are really the first to rival embryonic stem cells,” he said.

While scientists must destroy human life to obtain embryonic stem cells, McGuckin says they're in ready supply from a newborn's umbilical cord and its blood and able to be find in specific matches for patients.

“Ultimately we will be able to achieve the same result from non-embryonic stem cells. Some 100 million children are born every year, that is an awful lot of stem cells if you want to find a tissue type that matches you," he said.

Meanwhile, embryonic stem cell transplants also have problems with cancers and tumors afterwards, but McGuckin said that's not the case with adult stem cells from the umbilical cord.

McGuckin also told the Times that a little bit of umbilical cord blood goes a long way. He indicated that storing the blood from just one baby born out of 5,000 would ensure enough adult stem cells for the entire population.

http://www.lifenews.com/bio1604.html

 

[Stephanie]

Embryonic Stem Cells Hold Possible Cure For Diabetes

 

[Adam's Apple]

And now for the real science on the subject .....
http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/scireport/chapter7.asp

Here's some scientists who disagree with your post, Jillian. Adult stem cell research is not just a "promise" of results; it's producing results NOW. Be sure to read my earlier post about what the Irish scientists are doing with adult stem cells NOW.

Adult Stem Cell Research May Hold Promise for Diabetes Cure
by Maria Gallagher, LifeNews.com Staff Writer
March 26, 2004

Gainesvile, FL (LifeNews.com) -- New evidence suggests that adult stem cells may hold the key to unlocking the mystery behind diabetes. The latest findings add to the growing body of evidence suggesting that adult stem cell research is superior to embryonic stem cell research, which involves the killing of human embryos.

Researchers at the University of Florida report that they've cultured adult bone marrow stem cells to become insulin-producing cells. The resulting cells managed to bring blood glucose levels back to normal in diabetic laboratory animals.

Previous research has indicated that pancreatic stem cells and liver stem cells can also produce insulin. However, scientific experts say that marrow cells are easier to harvest.

Researchers frequently introduce stem cells through microsurgery, but doctors hope to eventually attach therapeutic cells to parts of the body that are easy to reach, such as the back of the neck.

The University of Florida study showed that stem cells stabilized the glucose levels of lab animals for more than three months. Still, scientists are not certain if humans would experience the same therapeutic results.

According to the Florida researchers, the implanted stem cells produced insulin in the same amounts that healthy cells do.

Researchers around the world have been reporting favorable results from adult stem cell research.

To date, no cures have been reported from embryonic stem cells. Embryonic stem cell research is opposed by pro-life groups because it involves the destruction of innocent life.

Bradley Mattes, Executive Director of Life Issues Institute, a pro-life organization based in Cincinnati, noted that embryonic stem cell research, or ESCR, has failed to show any promise in fighting diabetes. Yet, the Juvenile Diabetes Foundation has been a strong promoter of ESCR. Pretty odd, if you ask me, when significant results are already being produced by scientists/researchers using adult stem cells.

The San Francisco Chronicle reported that Paul Billings, who has studied the impact of stem cells and even co-founded a stem cell bank, said hopes for major new medical treatments based on ESCR were "very remote."

Billings added, "The problems are so complex that we're not likely to be able to tackle them with the stem cell gambit in the foreseeable future."

ESCR in China has proven a disaster.

Once fetal tissue was injected into a patient's brain, the patient developed a brain tumor and died. The fetal cells transformed into all types of human tissue within the brain, including hair, skin, and bone.

An ESCR study at Columbia University's College of Physicians and Surgeons, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, was equally devastating.

At the time, Dr. Paul E. Greene said patients who had been implanted with embryonic stem cells "chew constantly, their fingers go up and down, their wrists flex and distend. It's a real nightmare. And we can't selectively turn it off. No more fetal transplants."

While Harvard Medical School is now touting fetal stem cell research, the school's own studies indicate adult stem cell research may eliminate the need for ESCR. A Harvard study showed that adult stem cells could be effective in combating not only diabetes, but more than 50 other ailments as well.

Diane Irving, Ph.D., a former biochemist with the National Cancer Institute, said, "I have argued that adult stem cells are better because they are closer to the stage of differentiation than embryonic or fetal cells--therefore they do not have as long a distance to travel differentiation-wise as the younger cells. Therefore there is far less of a chance for genetic errors to be accumulated in the implanted cells and less side effects for the patient to deal with."

for full article:
http://www.lifenews.com/bio250.html

 

[jillian]

Here's some scientists who disagree with your post, Jillian. Adult stem cell research is not just a "promise" of results; it's producing results NOW. Be sure to read my earlier post about what the Irish scientists are doing with adult stem cells NOW.

Adult Stem Cell Research May Hold Promise for Diabetes Cure
by Maria Gallagher, LifeNews.com Staff Writer
March 26, 2004

Gainesvile, FL (LifeNews.com) -- New evidence suggests that adult stem cells may hold the key to unlocking the mystery behind diabetes. The latest findings add to the growing body of evidence suggesting that adult stem cell research is superior to embryonic stem cell research, which involves the killing of human embryos.

Researchers at the University of Florida report that they've cultured adult bone marrow stem cells to become insulin-producing cells. The resulting cells managed to bring blood glucose levels back to normal in diabetic laboratory animals.

Previous research has indicated that pancreatic stem cells and liver stem cells can also produce insulin. However, scientific experts say that marrow cells are easier to harvest.

Researchers frequently introduce stem cells through microsurgery, but doctors hope to eventually attach therapeutic cells to parts of the body that are easy to reach, such as the back of the neck.

The University of Florida study showed that stem cells stabilized the glucose levels of lab animals for more than three months. Still, scientists are not certain if humans would experience the same therapeutic results.

According to the Florida researchers, the implanted stem cells produced insulin in the same amounts that healthy cells do.

Researchers around the world have been reporting favorable results from adult stem cell research.

To date, no cures have been reported from embryonic stem cells. Embryonic stem cell research is opposed by pro-life groups because it involves the destruction of innocent life.

Bradley Mattes, Executive Director of Life Issues Institute, a pro-life organization based in Cincinnati, noted that embryonic stem cell research, or ESCR, has failed to show any promise in fighting diabetes. Yet, the Juvenile Diabetes Foundation has been a strong promoter of ESCR. Pretty odd, if you ask me, when significant results are already being produced by scientists/researchers using adult stem cells.

The San Francisco Chronicle reported that Paul Billings, who has studied the impact of stem cells and even co-founded a stem cell bank, said hopes for major new medical treatments based on ESCR were "very remote."

Billings added, "The problems are so complex that we're not likely to be able to tackle them with the stem cell gambit in the foreseeable future."

ESCR in China has proven a disaster.

Once fetal tissue was injected into a patient's brain, the patient developed a brain tumor and died. The fetal cells transformed into all types of human tissue within the brain, including hair, skin, and bone.

An ESCR study at Columbia University's College of Physicians and Surgeons, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, was equally devastating.

At the time, Dr. Paul E. Greene said patients who had been implanted with embryonic stem cells "chew constantly, their fingers go up and down, their wrists flex and distend. It's a real nightmare. And we can't selectively turn it off. No more fetal transplants."

While Harvard Medical School is now touting fetal stem cell research, the school's own studies indicate adult stem cell research may eliminate the need for ESCR. A Harvard study showed that adult stem cells could be effective in combating not only diabetes, but more than 50 other ailments as well.

Diane Irving, Ph.D., a former biochemist with the National Cancer Institute, said, "I have argued that adult stem cells are better because they are closer to the stage of differentiation than embryonic or fetal cells--therefore they do not have as long a distance to travel differentiation-wise as the younger cells. Therefore there is far less of a chance for genetic errors to be accumulated in the implanted cells and less side effects for the patient to deal with."

for full article:
http://www.lifenews.com/bio250.html

They are not "scientists". They are pretend scientists with an agenda that is not compatible with science, yet who muddy the waters for those silly enough to listen to them.

 

[Annie]

They are not "scientists". They are pretend scientists with an agenda that is not compatible with science, yet who muddy the waters for those silly enough to listen to them.

Which are you having problems with being, silly?

Researchers at the University of Florida?

To date, no cures have been reported from embryonic stem cells?

Juvenile Diabetes Foundation?

An ESCR study at Columbia University's College of Physicians and Surgeons?

Harvard Medical School is now touting fetal stem cell research, the school's own studies indicate adult stem cell research may eliminate the need for ESCR. A Harvard study showed that adult stem cells could be effective in combating not only diabetes, but more than 50 other ailments as well.

Diane Irving, Ph.D., a former biochemist with the National Cancer Institute, said, "I have argued that adult stem cells are better because they are closer to the stage of differentiation than embryonic or fetal cells--therefore they do not have as long a distance to travel differentiation-wise as the younger cells. Therefore there is far less of a chance for genetic errors to be accumulated in the implanted cells and less side effects for the patient to deal with."

 

[Mr. P]

They are not "scientists". They are pretend scientists with an agenda that is not compatible with science, yet who muddy the waters for those silly enough to listen to them.

I really can't believe you posted such BS.

 

[jillian]

I really can't believe you posted such BS.

Sorry. I just can't believe that anyone would deny people potential cures for illness based on their religious beliefs.

There are no guarantees in scientific research. Penicilin, chemotherapy, polio vaccines were all discovered after painstaking research. And that research wasn't halted in its tracks by people who complained there are no guarantees.

 

[Mr. P]

Sorry. I just can't believe that anyone would deny people potential cures for illness based on their religious beliefs.

There are no guarantees in scientific research. Penicilin, chemotherapy, polio vaccines were all discovered after painstaking research. And that research wasn't halted in its tracks by people who complained there are no guarantees.

You said in post#6 these people were not "scientists". Is that what you really meant? Or were you focusing on just one tiny bit of post #5?

 

[Annie]

Sorry. I just can't believe that anyone would deny people potential cures for illness based on their religious beliefs.

There are no guarantees in scientific research. Penicilin, chemotherapy, polio vaccines were all discovered after painstaking research. And that research wasn't halted in its tracks by people who complained there are no guarantees.

Nothing I posted was based on my 'religious beliefs'. Why the spin?

 

[jillian]

You said in post#6 these people were not "scientists". Is that what you really meant? Or were you focusing on just one tiny bit of post #5?

I give them the NIH's latest info on the subject and they give me back garbage from "lifenet". I've never seen anything printed in an anti-choice or religious site accurately represent anything scientific. Religious sites should stick to religion and leave the science to scientists.

And to short circuit what was said to me (not by you) the other day... I have no problem with religion or religious people or scientists who happen to be believers. Nor do I think science and belief are necessarily incompatible. But fundamentalism and science are.

If someone has a religious objection to embryonic stem cell research, they can certainly choose not to avail themselves of the benefits of that research. But to keep others from benefitting from it is a sin.

 

[Annie]

I give them the NIH's latest info on the subject and they give me back garbage from "lifenet". I've never seen anything printed in an anti-choice or religious site accurately represent anything scientific. Religious sites should stick to religion and leave the science to scientists.

And to short circuit what was said to me (not by you) the other day... I have no problem with religion or religious people or scientists who happen to be believers. Nor do I think science and belief are necessarily incompatible. But fundamentalism and science are.

If someone has a religious objection to embryonic stem cell research, they can certainly choose not to avail themselves of the benefits of that research. But to keep others from benefitting from it is a sin.

Where is anyone shriking your choice or any research? You're just pissed that we don't wish to fund it federally.

 

[jillian]

Where is anyone shriking your choice or any research? You're just pissed that we don't wish to fund it federally.

You've already been told why that was a specious argument.

Pissed? I'd say that watching a bunch of extremists try to halt scientific research is a bit mind-boggling.I also think it's immoral.

 

[onedomino]

To date, no cures have been reported from embryonic stem cells?

And no "cures" have been reported with ASCs either. There are bone marrow transplants, but they are not “cures.” ESC R&D is less than 8 years old. The first ESC line was isolated in 1998. ASC R&D is more than 40 years old. As I mentioned, real world treatments derived from ASC R&D are relabeled bone marrow transplants. There are no viable diabetes, Parkinson's, spinal trauma, or heart disease treatments derived from ASC R&D. Yet these are just some of the maladies that many scientists think may yield to ESC R&D. But the research will take many years, just as it did with ASC R&D.

 

[CockySOB]

Sorry. I just can't believe that anyone would deny people potential cures for illness based on their religious beliefs.

There are no guarantees in scientific research. Penicilin, chemotherapy, polio vaccines were all discovered after painstaking research. And that research wasn't halted in its tracks by people who complained there are no guarantees.

Jillian, if ESR had even a snowballs chance in Hell of being successful, the major bio-med companies would be lobbying to have it approved if not fast-tracked. The fact of the matter is that those companies do not see ESR as being anywhere NEAR viable for productive research, hence they refuse to fight for it. The only people fighting for ESR are the pro-abortion crowd who see it as a means of furthering their agenda.

 

[Mr. P]

I give them the NIH's latest info on the subject and they give me back garbage from "lifenet". I've never seen anything printed in an anti-choice or religious site accurately represent anything scientific. Religious sites should stick to religion and leave the science to scientists.

And to short circuit what was said to me (not by you) the other day... I have no problem with religion or religious people or scientists who happen to be believers. Nor do I think science and belief are necessarily incompatible. But fundamentalism and science are.

If someone has a religious objection to embryonic stem cell research, they can certainly choose not to avail themselves of the benefits of that research. But to keep others from benefitting from it is a sin.

Ok I'm clear now. Can't say I disagree either, cept maybe for the sin part, don't know about that.

 

[Adam's Apple]

I really can't believe you posted such BS.

I couldn't believe it either. I was stunned by such nonsense from our liberal lady lawyer. I expected better from someone who holds such strong beliefs in the superiority of embryonic stem cell research

 

[Adam's Apple]

If someone has a religious objection to embryonic stem cell research, they can certainly choose not to avail themselves of the benefits of that research. But to keep others from benefitting from it is a sin.

Here's the floor, Jillian. Please enlighten us on the "benefits of that [ESC] research" that are not being accomplished NOW with adult stem cell research.

 

[Adam's Apple]

And no "cures" have been reported with ASCs either.

There are no cures effected yet, but you cannot deny the overwhelming advances in treatments made through ASC research. Scientists/ researchers know far more today about the nature of these diseases, thanks to ASC research, than has previously been known.

Why should we give taxpayer support to ESC research when researchers and scientists are telling us there's tons of problems encountered with it that have not been encountered during 40 years of research with ASC's? When more than one alternative is available for finding cures to diseases in this area, why are you insisting that ESC research is the one and only way to go? ESC involves the destruction of the human embryo to proceed; ASC involves no such ethical problem.