Injections from own bone marrow can increase survival, new study finds
Article Source: msnbc.com
from:msnbc.comHeart failure patients can benefit from their own stem cells
Seeded on Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:55 PM EDT (msnbc.com)
- msnbc.com sites & shows:
- TODAY
- Rock Center
- Nightly News
- Meet the Press
- Dateline
- Morning Joe
- Hardball
- Ed
- Maddow
- Last Word
- msnbc tv
Leave a Comment:
More research needs to be done and funding needs to continue here in the U.S. I believe that stem cell research will lead to ground breaking medical treatments and will save many lives and will also reduce medical costs to the tax payers in the long run. It will lead to a longer average life span and may even lead to, who knows, immortality? If medical science can begin to repair the body, even the brain, what's to kill us? Maybe it will be the end to many illnesses and diseases. I really hope that the Conservatives aren't successful in blocking this research; face it, they want you to die and be with God (or the devil for that matter) if you have a lethal disease or genetic disorder (to them it's God's will). Thanks to G.W. Bush we are decades behind in this research compared to other countries. Hopefully the U.S. can become a leader in this field. It could change lives forever and could give people real hope of living normal lives. For example, if a person had kidney failure and was on dialysis ,they could grow them another set of kidney's to replace the failed ones and take them off of dialysis. This would save millions of taxpayer dollars that pays for dialysis every year.
Blame it on Bush and the conservatives. Why the hell should taxpayers be nickeled and dimed every time you need your kidneys tapped? Decades behind in research compared to other countries? Try a little exercise - you might be surprised about what you could do for yourself.
So you are suggesting that people on dialysis should get more exercise as if that could keep them from having kidney failure? What kind of moron are you? Do you even know what dialysis is for? People on dialysis have kidney failure which has not a thing to do with how much exercise they get. And if they don't get dialysis THEY WILL DIE! Is that what you want?
To repeat what I said on an earlier topic:
Adult stem cell therapy has been proven effective. Embryonic stem cell research is not necessary.
While that would negate the argument of Conservatives in regards to the religious problems, what if it were to be discovered that embryonic stem cells served a better purpose? I don't think there is enough research to know for sure that adult stem cells will always be the answer, unless you know this for sure. Then great, I would be glad so the Conservatives could pipe down and stop interjecting there beliefs into everybody's lives.
"What if" indeed. So far, that hasn't been the case, so your point is moot.
OneDirtyRat, please point me to a single effective embryonic stem cell therapy. I know of at least 3 successful adult stem cell therapies.
We are just on the cusp of learning about the power of stem cells. Personally I think in 200 years from now we won't need to use embryonic stem cells for research or treatment.
However, getting to that point will require significant research. Research that may require the study of embryonic stem cells. I liken it to trying to land a man on Mars for research, but not trying to land any rovers to scout first.
You're tying your hands and not learning the basics before more advanced techniques.
jwhite: My point may be moot now, but as you said, "so far". So that means that maybe sometime in the future that might change and I wouldn't want to stop research because of some religious people injecting there beliefs on me and keep me from getting the medical treatments I or others might need to have a normal healthy life.
Ben: see #4 below
Restricting embryonic stem cell research has not stifled the pursuit of anyone having a normal healthy life. The story connected to this thread demonstrates the effectiveness of adult stem cells in heart patients. Please see the links below:
Adult Stem Cells and Diabetes: http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2001/08.16/01-stemcells.html
Adult Stem Cells and Macular Degeneration: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/07/020730075401.htm
Adult Stem Cells and Parkinson's: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080606102603.htm
Adult Stem Cells and Liver Disease
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4573453.stm
Adult Stem cells and HIV
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/02/11/health.hiv.stemcell/index.html
Adult Stem Cells and Cancer
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090519172051.htm
Some if this research has not yet translated into actual therapy, but as you can see no one is suffering for lack of the federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.
Adult Stem cells and Spinal Cord injuries: http://www.webmd.com/alzheimers/news/20040624/paralysis-patients-tout-adult-stem-cells
Adult Stem Cells and Arthritis: http://stemcellresearchnews.net/News/AdultStemCellsHelpEaseArthritis.aspx
Adult Stem Cells and Stroke: http://www.cellmedicine.com/news332.asp
Adult Stem Cells and Deafness: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/21892.php
Adult Stem Cells and Cerebral Palsy: http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2010/02/15/Cerebral-palsy-stem-cell-trial-begins/UPI-57571266270159/
Adult Stem Cells and Alzheimer's: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/5873215/Stem-cells-can-rescue-the-memory-from-Alzheimers-disease-claim-scientists.html
Adult Stem Cells and hip replacements: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6118220/New-stem-cell-treatment-being-used-by-patients-to-avoid-hip-replacements.html
OneDirtyRat, seeing #4 is just "pie in the sky."
Your argument is like the argument of pursuing fusion reactors, when fission reactor are so much simpler and available.... while no fusion reactor has yet produced a net amount of energy... Clearly fusion reactors have a much higher potential, but decades of research have not been able to produce anything like the benefit of fission reactors.
So why the hell would you steal money from proven adult stem cell research to fund something (embryonic stem cell therapies) that may never yield results?
If there is nothing to be gained from embryonic stem cell research, then, yes I agree we should focus on adult stem cell research.
Are you against embryonic stem cell research because you are against abortions?
yes, "what if." onedirtyrat, if adult stem cells work fine (especially your own), why kill babies to use their stem cells? doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
No one said anything about killing babies to use their stem cells. Your definition of a baby differs from my definition. Like I stated before, if using adult stem cells works fine for growing the body parts that people need, great. But if using embryonic stem cells is the better or only way to grow certain organs, I see no problem in that either.
Stem cells (regardless of source) offer amazing potential to treat human disease and research should not be halted or even affected because of things like religion.
Here's one example of embryonic stem cell therapy being successful: http://www.ocmetro.com/t-UCI_success_stem_cell_11-0909.aspx Scientist restored some limb function to rats with broken necks, just think with more research we could perhaps cure paralysis. This was the first trial on embryonic stem cells the FDA allowed to happen, and it was successful. Imagine the progress we could make if the FDA allowed more trials and experiments to go on!
Unless you're referring to veterinary care, I don't believe the restoring limb function to rats is an example of a successful therapy.
The FDA does not restrict stem cell therapy at all.
We are gradually getting to the point where stem cell therapy will be the course of treatment for most diseases down the line. Today if you have had a heart attack (like myself) then you know that there is nothing that can be done. The heart muscle is dead. But this results show that we are headed in the right directon. Not only for heart muscle but imagine growing new nerve cells for alzheimers patients or Parkinsons. Hope for kidney patients. The possibilties are endless. Medicine has made great strides in the last 10 years thanks to technology (genome mapping ec) and other research so I know that in another 20 years medicine will be saving lives as we cannot imagine today. Thanks to stem cell research, In 20 years a damaged heart will not be considered hopeless. Tomorrow's medicine hold so much hope for future generations like my niece and nephew.
Stem cell research has the best potential to cure more diseases and health problems than anything else.
Research should continue - despite the political and religious arguments it causes. God gave man a brain, and using our brains to develop cures for "incurable conditions" is a DARN GOOD use of the brains God gave us!
To the morons who say embryonic stem cell research has not produced results, so is therefore not needed, I'll point out that there has not been as much research in that area yet, thanks to Bush and the far right. Your argument is akin to saying paint doesn't improve the front of the house when it hasn't been painted yet.
That is incorrect.
Research on embryonic stem cells continues. It is not illegal. However, embryonic stem cells have not been demonstrated to have any meaningful advantages over adult stem cells.
Your response is less than accurate. With federal funding restricted by the right, much less study on embryonic stem cells was conducted. With fewer studies, fewer results would be expected. Those fewer results do not indicate a lessen potential, and nothing would ever justify lack or research with embryonic stem cells well beyond the few Bush approved.
Even if you restricted adult stem cell research to be proportionate to that of embryonic stem cell research, the success of adult stem cell therapy would still outpace that of embryonic stem cell therapy.
And keep in mind that both fields have had equal amounts of time. Adult stem cells have received far more breakthroughs in that time than embryonic stem cells.
Both fields have NOT had equal amounts of time, nor resources. Facts are facts. During the Bush years embryonic stem cell research was significantly restricted to a handful of existing samples. You anti-embryonic stem cell position is clear, as well as misguided, and hopefully headed for history's dustbin.
Please be aware that the Bush restrictions did not affect other countries. Many countries do not restrict embryonic stem cell research at all.
So yes, embryonic stem cell research has had plenty of time and resources to prove itself. My preference to adult stem cell research is obvious. It is also shared by many a medical professional.
It's amazing how many disingenuous "examples" you can fabricate. If I'm not mistaken, more medical research is conducted in the US than elsewhere. We spend upwards of three times more than any other country on stem cell research, yet for years were restricted.
Regardless of how many bits of partial facts you assemble, your conclusion is wrong and will remain wrong.
Please show which of the examples I have fabricated, as I have connected each one with links. If there is a link that contains a fabrication, I will post a different example.
More medical research is conducted in the US than elsewhere, however, people make it sound like US funds embryonic research less than elsewhere. Are you now saying that this is not the case? If US funds more embryonic research than elsewhere, then why hasn't the US had more success in finding cures for disease using cells from embryos?
No matter how much I appeal to reason, it does not seem to matter. However, you can't argue with results.
If you're not stupid, you're doing a great job of posing!
Because, the Bush administration restricted government funding to anything beyond a small set of preexisting samples. Therefore the US, which does more research, has conducted less research using embryonic stem cells.
I had stem cell from my own bone marrow injected around my heart, my EF went from 20% to 45%, so that must tell you it works, I feel great
Where, when, how much?? I have a very damaged heart, first EF at 10% (from a virus), and they (at the VA) don't give me long. Pieces are beginning to fall apart, I think from lack of circulation. VA wants heart transplant. That would be the end of me at age 64. If you make it through the operation itself (six-hundred fifty three thousand dollars, then $21 thousand for the rest of your life for the meds that will kill you,) it's sort of like having AIDS
I don't know where to go next.
John Suliot jsuliot@gmail.com
The advantage of embryonic stem cells over adult stem cells is that embryonic stem cells are not differentiated yet. What this means is, the embyronic stem cells (to put in simple terms) don't know what they want to be when they grow up. In other words, they can be used in a variety of ways because they are not fully matured, and they will become the type of cell needed by where they are used in the body. Adult stem cells are all they will ever be.....cardiac cells in the heart, liver cells in the liver, etc. I don't believe in killing babies for embryonic stem cell research, but I do think we should use the cell lines already available as much as possible.
Having suffered a heart attack in 2006, I am VERY interested in the stem cell research for damaged hearts. Unfortunately, the article from NBC Nightly News is no longer available. If anyone has a copy, or knows of where the research is being done, I would appreciate hearing from them. I would like to become a test patient wherever this research is being done. I thought it was somewhere in Florida. Any help??
I would like to be a volunteer for this research.