'Stem cell injections may causer tumors'

[toomuchtime_]

Israeli researchers are the first in the world to have documented that the injection of stem cells from aborted human fetuses can trigger tumors.

Stem cells, especially those from few-day-old embryos, are considered by many to be a potential cure for a wide variety of chronic disorders - from Parkinson's and Alzheimer's to diabetes and heart disease - because they have the ability to produce new cells of all types for the repair of diseased organs.

But the new research, based on the case of a now-16-year-old Israeli youth suffering from a rare genetic degenerative disease who underwent the highly experimental injections in Russia, is the first documented case of a human brain tumor - albeit a benign, slow-growing one - after fetal stem cell therapy, and sounds an alarm that future stem cell use must be preceded by extensive research.

The patient, born here to parents of Moroccan origin, developed ataxia telangiectasia (AT) as a young child. Degeneration of a certain brain region gradually robs these children of movement, and a faulty immune system leads to frequent infections and cancers. Most victims die in their teens or early 20s.

Although the boy's doctors at Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, urged the desperate parents against it, they took him to an unnamed clinic in Moscow for injections of fetal stem cells into his brain and spinal cord.

He returned to Russia twice - at age 10 and 12 - for more injections.

Then, at the age of 13, he developed painful headaches, and an MRI scan showed he had tumors in several parts of the brain and the spinal cord.

Two-and-a-half years ago, hematology Prof. Gideon Rechavi, head of Sheba's Cancer Center and Tel Aviv University's Cancer Biology Center, headed a team that investigated the case and found after extensive pathological and genetic research that the tumors were not germane to the patient, but were sourced from at least two fetuses whose foreign tissue had been injected into him.

For example, the tumors contained both XX (female) and XY (male) cells, while if they had come from the boy's body they could not have female chromosomes. They also had two normal copies of the ATM gene, which causes AT when mutated. Since the boy has AT, those genes cannot be his.

The team noted, however, that the fact that the boy has AT may have facilitated the growth of the tumors because of the weak immune system in such patients.

'Stem cell injections may causer tumors' | Health | Jerusalem Post

 

[KittenKoder]

Without pointing out the flaws in this study I will say ... duh.

When you add cells than can mimic anything into a body without a level of control they will almost always turn into cancer, that's what cancer is, the wrong cells. Stem cells mimic what is closest to them (to over simplify the process) and thus injecting them in a place where there are many different cells there is no telling what they will mimic, if they mimic the wrong ones they will become cancerous. Since they can also grow faster than normal cells they will most likely become a tumor if they are not stopped soon enough even if they do what is planned.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Without pointing out the flaws in this study I will say ... duh.

When you add cells than can mimic anything into a body without a level of control they will almost always turn into cancer, that's what cancer is, the wrong cells. Stem cells mimic what is closest to them (to over simplify the process) and thus injecting them in a place where there are many different cells there is no telling what they will mimic, if they mimic the wrong ones they will become cancerous. Since they can also grow faster than normal cells they will most likely become a tumor if they are not stopped soon enough even if they do what is planned.

However, in this case, no evidence was found of indigenous cancer cells. The cancer seems to have been entirely introduced by the stem cells rather than the stem cells mimicking indigenous cancer cells.

 

[KittenKoder]

Without pointing out the flaws in this study I will say ... duh.

When you add cells than can mimic anything into a body without a level of control they will almost always turn into cancer, that's what cancer is, the wrong cells. Stem cells mimic what is closest to them (to over simplify the process) and thus injecting them in a place where there are many different cells there is no telling what they will mimic, if they mimic the wrong ones they will become cancerous. Since they can also grow faster than normal cells they will most likely become a tumor if they are not stopped soon enough even if they do what is planned.

However, in this case, no evidence was found of indigenous cancer cells. The cancer seems to have been entirely introduced by the stem cells rather than the stem cells mimicking indigenous cancer cells.

Um ... reread what I said again. Of course you proved that you know even less about it than those who attempted it in the first place.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Without pointing out the flaws in this study I will say ... duh.

When you add cells than can mimic anything into a body without a level of control they will almost always turn into cancer, that's what cancer is, the wrong cells. Stem cells mimic what is closest to them (to over simplify the process) and thus injecting them in a place where there are many different cells there is no telling what they will mimic, if they mimic the wrong ones they will become cancerous. Since they can also grow faster than normal cells they will most likely become a tumor if they are not stopped soon enough even if they do what is planned.

However, in this case, no evidence was found of indigenous cancer cells. The cancer seems to have been entirely introduced by the stem cells rather than the stem cells mimicking indigenous cancer cells.

Um ... reread what I said again. Of course you proved that you know even less about it than those who attempted it in the first place.

Apparently you either didn't read the article or didn't understand it. None of the cancer cells found came from the boy; all of them came from the stem cell donors. To put it another way, there is no evidence that there were any cancer cells in the boy for the stem cells to mimic. That means that the process that led some of the stem cells to turn into cancer cells was not that of mimicking cells already in the boy's body. That's what makes the study interesting. If cancer cells not identified with the stem cells had been found, there would have been no reason to publish the study.

 

[KittenKoder]

However, in this case, no evidence was found of indigenous cancer cells. The cancer seems to have been entirely introduced by the stem cells rather than the stem cells mimicking indigenous cancer cells.

Um ... reread what I said again. Of course you proved that you know even less about it than those who attempted it in the first place.

Apparently you either didn't read the article or didn't understand it. None of the cancer cells found came from the boy; all of them came from the stem cell donors. To put it another way, there is no evidence that there were any cancer cells in the boy for the stem cells to mimic. That means that the process that led some of the stem cells to turn into cancer cells was not that of mimicking cells already in the boy's body. That's what makes the study interesting. If cancer cells not identified with the stem cells had been found, there would have been no reason to publish the study.

Okay .. again, reread it, but here to help you I will bold why your response to mine shows you didn't read my first one:

When you add cells than can mimic anything into a body without a level of control they will almost always turn into cancer, that's what cancer is, the wrong cells. Stem cells mimic what is closest to them (to over simplify the process) and thus injecting them in a place where there are many different cells there is no telling what they will mimic(Like if they happen to have a few liver cells where they inject it to help repair a kidney some will also mimic the liver cells and others the kidney resulting in liver cells now in the wrong place), if they mimic the wrong ones they will become cancerous. Since they can also grow faster than normal cells they will most likely become a tumor if they are not stopped soon enough even if they do what is planned. (In other words, like all cancers they grow out of control.)

Honestly, I didn't think you were that simple minded. Any knowledgeable biologist would tell you that you really shouldn't just inject stem cells into any living organism, you have to program them first to keep them controlled. Look into what India is doing with them for spinal fluids and bone marrow, but read their methods as well, you will then understand why I said that the doctors screwed up in this case and why there is so much wrong with the story.

 

[KittenKoder]

Oh, and I also recommend you look up what cancer is as well.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Um ... reread what I said again. Of course you proved that you know even less about it than those who attempted it in the first place.

Apparently you either didn't read the article or didn't understand it. None of the cancer cells found came from the boy; all of them came from the stem cell donors. To put it another way, there is no evidence that there were any cancer cells in the boy for the stem cells to mimic. That means that the process that led some of the stem cells to turn into cancer cells was not that of mimicking cells already in the boy's body. That's what makes the study interesting. If cancer cells not identified with the stem cells had been found, there would have been no reason to publish the study.

Okay .. again, reread it, but here to help you I will bold why your response to mine shows you didn't read my first one:

When you add cells than can mimic anything into a body without a level of control they will almost always turn into cancer, that's what cancer is, the wrong cells. Stem cells mimic what is closest to them (to over simplify the process) and thus injecting them in a place where there are many different cells there is no telling what they will mimic(Like if they happen to have a few liver cells where they inject it to help repair a kidney some will also mimic the liver cells and others the kidney resulting in liver cells now in the wrong place), if they mimic the wrong ones they will become cancerous. Since they can also grow faster than normal cells they will most likely become a tumor if they are not stopped soon enough even if they do what is planned. (In other words, like all cancers they grow out of control.)

Honestly, I didn't think you were that simple minded. Any knowledgeable biologist would tell you that you really shouldn't just inject stem cells into any living organism, you have to program them first to keep them controlled. Look into what India is doing with them for spinal fluids and bone marrow, but read their methods as well, you will then understand why I said that the doctors screwed up in this case and why there is so much wrong with the story.

For some reason you seem to be pretending to understand things you clearly don't understand. A misplaced liver does not become a cancer cell. A cancer cell is a cell that has one or more of a few genetic abnormalities that either prevent cell death and/or promote hyperactive growth and cell division. Since all the cells that showed these abnormalities were from the donor, there is no evidence that the boy had had any cells with these abnormalities for the stem cells to mimic.

Stop trying to bullshit. You're not even close to being convincing.

 

[KittenKoder]

Apparently you either didn't read the article or didn't understand it. None of the cancer cells found came from the boy; all of them came from the stem cell donors. To put it another way, there is no evidence that there were any cancer cells in the boy for the stem cells to mimic. That means that the process that led some of the stem cells to turn into cancer cells was not that of mimicking cells already in the boy's body. That's what makes the study interesting. If cancer cells not identified with the stem cells had been found, there would have been no reason to publish the study.

Okay .. again, reread it, but here to help you I will bold why your response to mine shows you didn't read my first one:

When you add cells than can mimic anything into a body without a level of control they will almost always turn into cancer, that's what cancer is, the wrong cells. Stem cells mimic what is closest to them (to over simplify the process) and thus injecting them in a place where there are many different cells there is no telling what they will mimic(Like if they happen to have a few liver cells where they inject it to help repair a kidney some will also mimic the liver cells and others the kidney resulting in liver cells now in the wrong place), if they mimic the wrong ones they will become cancerous. Since they can also grow faster than normal cells they will most likely become a tumor if they are not stopped soon enough even if they do what is planned. (In other words, like all cancers they grow out of control.)

Honestly, I didn't think you were that simple minded. Any knowledgeable biologist would tell you that you really shouldn't just inject stem cells into any living organism, you have to program them first to keep them controlled. Look into what India is doing with them for spinal fluids and bone marrow, but read their methods as well, you will then understand why I said that the doctors screwed up in this case and why there is so much wrong with the story.

For some reason you seem to be pretending to understand things you clearly don't understand. A misplaced liver does not become a cancer cell. A cancer cell is a cell that has one or more of a few genetic abnormalities that either prevent cell death and/or promote hyperactive growth and cell division. Since all the cells that showed these abnormalities were from the donor, there is no evidence that the boy had had any cells with these abnormalities for the stem cells to mimic.

Stop trying to bullshit. You're not even close to being convincing.

LOL .. it is you who knows so little about cancer. Really, look it up a bit more. The word cancer means something that is out of place or alien in the environment, this is why cancer cells are given that name. Of course misplaced liver cells are not dangerous cancer unless they continue to grow out of control. Moles on your skin are cancer, freckles are cancer, scars are even cancer. But the only commonality between them all is that they are not suppose to be there.

 

[KittenKoder]

Quit looking for a lame excuse to hate one science and just look at how stupid those in the article were.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Quit looking for a lame excuse to hate one science and just look at how stupid those in the article were.

Well, that's pretty much an admission that you were inventing bullshit to discredit the article because you're a true believer in stem cell therapy and you thought the article was attacking it. If you had read the whole article and been able to understand it, you would have understood that the authors were not attacking stem cell research or stem cell therapy but merely pointing out that known processes by which stem cells turn into mature cells cannot readily explain this boy's tumors.

Again, if you had read the article before attacking it, you would have seen:

"We by no means suggest that stem cell research should be halted," Amariglio stressed. "Although this report indicates the need for caution in stem cell therapy, we do not imply that the research in stem cell therapeutics should be abandoned.

"We do suggest that extensive research into the biology of stem cells and in-depth preclinical studies, especially of safety, should be pursued in order to maximize the potential benefits of regenerative medicine while minimizing the risks."

Stem cells are not medications, Amariglio added, but are still unpredictable, so desperate patients should not undergo questionable "therapies" that could endanger them more than their disease.