6 ms·

Just in case anyone is wondering -- though at this point, isn't it your first guess? -- the stem cells used in this therapy were adult stem cells, meaning they

by jawns 10y ago

Just in case anyone is wondering -- though at this point, isn't it your first guess? -- the stem cells used in this therapy were adult stem cells, meaning they were collected from her own body, as opposed to embryonic stem cells. I mention it here because the article doesn't give that info until about half-way down.

Teever 10y ago
I don't understand why you felt it necessary to mention this. I think it's half-way down in the article because it's not really the most important aspect of the conversation. I think the fact that MS has been cured in some people for the first time is far more relevant than the source of the stemcells used to cure MS.
- KevanM 10y ago
  Depends how you feel about stem cell research.
  - forthefuture 10y ago
    I long for days when it won't really matter how you feel about stem cell research.
  - dave_sullivan 10y ago
    I feel like it's been held back for a decade or two by, mostly, the religious right, and I wonder how many people's lives are worse off as a result.
    - refurb 10y ago
      Why was it held back? The only legislation passed was around gov't funding of new embyonic stem cell lines. Private money has no restrictions.
    - wtbob 10y ago
      I wonder how many more lives would have been ended had federal dollars funded research using embryonic stem cells.
      - dave_sullivan 10y ago
        The religious right (US-version): Life begins at conception and every life is special. Also for: guns, more prisons, war on drugs, war on terror, global warming does not exist, borderline racist social policies, george bush jr., "doesn't trust science", lack of financial success can only be the result of personal failings (and choices), and no taxes because "who needs roads" and "I did it all myself". Not saying you (PP) share any of those, but why is it that the supposed humanitarian group when it comes to embryos tends to treat actual living members of society so poorly? Meanwhile, the bleeding heart liberals are all baby killers (or at least, there's a rather large distinction between embryos and babies, in their opinion). Serious question, isn't that a weird dichotomy?
        lizardskull 10y ago
        A group who actively works to convince others they are victims is treating others poorly.
- melling 10y ago
  I don't understand why you don't get it. There's a long history in the United States where people are strongly against funding stem cell research. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell_laws_and_policy_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell_laws_and_policy_in... People who don't understand the political climate are hindering science because of various groups. We could probably be a decade farther in research if more money was available for stem cell research 20 years ago, for example.
  - mhurron 10y ago
    > There's a long history in the United States Headline: Canadian Doctors. Americans can hide themselves away from the world in made up religious ideas, the rest of the world will get on.
    - JBReefer 10y ago
      Please don't be dismissive and shallow on hn. This is not Reddit.
      - woodchuck64 10y ago
        I take his point to be substantive: if Americans continue to tolerate the religious right's war on science, we will continue to fall behind the rest of the world.
        lostlogin 10y ago
        This comment will be interesting to look back on in ten years if Trump wins.
        themartorana 10y ago
        We're getting off track. America does a tremendous amount of the medical (and otherwise) science that helps progress modern medicine, and here we have a documented use of stem cells with an incredible outcome that is not encumbered at all with controversy. This is a win, no matter how calous you want to be about America. (New flash, religion affects the political climate all over the word.)
- Shivetya 10y ago
  Simply recalling days where there was a big bugaboo over the source of stem cells and how many were claiming that research would be forever stunted without full access to embryonic stem cells. While it likely did impact several promising areas of study it did end resulting in good research being performed in the field with what they could easily and without controversy obtain. Oddly while some outside the field attempted to limit the areas of research some inside were unintentionally limiting themselves as well
- protomyth 10y ago
  Well, a rather large part of the country want nothing to do with embryonic stem cells as they are linked directly with abortions. Non-embryonic stem cell research is pretty much only opposed by a small sliver of the population (generally the type that opposes everything). Treatments that use your own body as part of the cure are widely accepted as fine (well, expect by the FDA, but that's another article).
  - lostlogin 10y ago
    You can get a lot of non embryonic stem cells from your own placenta and cord (if it was kept). Had the cells been embryonic I wonder how many of the anti choice crowd would have changed their views.
    - protomyth 10y ago
      Yep, and I've seen women keeping those for that purpose (have no idea about how the long term storage is accomplished). Probably all of the anti-choice crowd, would be a bit hypocritical to change view. They would regard it as trading souls for souls.
      - lostlogin 10y ago
        I wonder who owns a placenta - child or mother? Presumably it's only handy to the child.
        protomyth 10y ago
        Well, I understand that it is handy for the mother in dealing with depression. I don't have the literature handy.
protomyth 10y ago
Just as important for USA readers is the line "They then hooked her up to a machine that cycled through her blood 32 times over the course of seven hours, in order to collect stem cells. Those stem cells were then purified, wiped of any memory of the disease, to later be transplanted into Molson through a blood transfusion." Our FDA has been making life a pain in the butt for anything that takes stem cells from a person, processes them, and then puts them back into that person.
- erkkie 10y ago
  Not just the FDA, but the EMA in Europe as well. "Non homologous use" or "substantial manipulation" makes it an ATMP (advanced-therapy medicinal product): http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2015/06/WC500187744.pdf http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scienti...

by jawns 10y ago

Teever 10y ago

I don't understand why you felt it necessary to mention this. I think it's half-way down in the article because it's not really the most important aspect of the conversation. I think the fact that MS has been cured in some people for the first time is far more relevant than the source of the stemcells used to cure MS.

KevanM 10y ago
Depends how you feel about stem cell research.
- forthefuture 10y ago
  I long for days when it won't really matter how you feel about stem cell research.
- dave_sullivan 10y ago
  I feel like it's been held back for a decade or two by, mostly, the religious right, and I wonder how many people's lives are worse off as a result.
  - refurb 10y ago
    Why was it held back? The only legislation passed was around gov't funding of new embyonic stem cell lines. Private money has no restrictions.
  - wtbob 10y ago
    I wonder how many more lives would have been ended had federal dollars funded research using embryonic stem cells.
    - dave_sullivan 10y ago
      The religious right (US-version): Life begins at conception and every life is special. Also for: guns, more prisons, war on drugs, war on terror, global warming does not exist, borderline racist social policies, george bush jr., "doesn't trust science", lack of financial success can only be the result of personal failings (and choices), and no taxes because "who needs roads" and "I did it all myself". Not saying you (PP) share any of those, but why is it that the supposed humanitarian group when it comes to embryos tends to treat actual living members of society so poorly? Meanwhile, the bleeding heart liberals are all baby killers (or at least, there's a rather large distinction between embryos and babies, in their opinion). Serious question, isn't that a weird dichotomy?
      - lizardskull 10y ago
        A group who actively works to convince others they are victims is treating others poorly.
melling 10y ago
I don't understand why you don't get it. There's a long history in the United States where people are strongly against funding stem cell research. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell_laws_and_policy_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell_laws_and_policy_in... People who don't understand the political climate are hindering science because of various groups. We could probably be a decade farther in research if more money was available for stem cell research 20 years ago, for example.
- mhurron 10y ago
  > There's a long history in the United States Headline: Canadian Doctors. Americans can hide themselves away from the world in made up religious ideas, the rest of the world will get on.
  - JBReefer 10y ago
    Please don't be dismissive and shallow on hn. This is not Reddit.
    - woodchuck64 10y ago
      I take his point to be substantive: if Americans continue to tolerate the religious right's war on science, we will continue to fall behind the rest of the world.
      - lostlogin 10y ago
        This comment will be interesting to look back on in ten years if Trump wins.
      - themartorana 10y ago
        We're getting off track. America does a tremendous amount of the medical (and otherwise) science that helps progress modern medicine, and here we have a documented use of stem cells with an incredible outcome that is not encumbered at all with controversy. This is a win, no matter how calous you want to be about America. (New flash, religion affects the political climate all over the word.)
Shivetya 10y ago
Simply recalling days where there was a big bugaboo over the source of stem cells and how many were claiming that research would be forever stunted without full access to embryonic stem cells. While it likely did impact several promising areas of study it did end resulting in good research being performed in the field with what they could easily and without controversy obtain. Oddly while some outside the field attempted to limit the areas of research some inside were unintentionally limiting themselves as well
protomyth 10y ago
Well, a rather large part of the country want nothing to do with embryonic stem cells as they are linked directly with abortions. Non-embryonic stem cell research is pretty much only opposed by a small sliver of the population (generally the type that opposes everything). Treatments that use your own body as part of the cure are widely accepted as fine (well, expect by the FDA, but that's another article).
- lostlogin 10y ago
  You can get a lot of non embryonic stem cells from your own placenta and cord (if it was kept). Had the cells been embryonic I wonder how many of the anti choice crowd would have changed their views.
  - protomyth 10y ago
    Yep, and I've seen women keeping those for that purpose (have no idea about how the long term storage is accomplished). Probably all of the anti-choice crowd, would be a bit hypocritical to change view. They would regard it as trading souls for souls.
    - lostlogin 10y ago
      I wonder who owns a placenta - child or mother? Presumably it's only handy to the child.
      - protomyth 10y ago
        Well, I understand that it is handy for the mother in dealing with depression. I don't have the literature handy.

protomyth 10y ago

Just as important for USA readers is the line "They then hooked her up to a machine that cycled through her blood 32 times over the course of seven hours, in order to collect stem cells. Those stem cells were then purified, wiped of any memory of the disease, to later be transplanted into Molson through a blood transfusion." Our FDA has been making life a pain in the butt for anything that takes stem cells from a person, processes them, and then puts them back into that person.

erkkie 10y ago
Not just the FDA, but the EMA in Europe as well. "Non homologous use" or "substantial manipulation" makes it an ATMP (advanced-therapy medicinal product): http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2015/06/WC500187744.pdf http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scienti...