Scientists Discover More Innovation With Stem Cells

The field of adult stem cell research is growing by leaps and bounds! There is an enormous progress taking place as we speak. Firstly, scientists discovered a better way to create induced pluripotent stem cells that can produce any cell type, thus being fully able to do what embryonic stem cells can do…

In Science Magazine… 

“Given the right instructions in the lab, mature cells can turn back into embryoniclike ones that researchers covet, but the process is frustratingly slow and inefficient. By removing a molecular brake, scientists have now figured out how to reprogram cells with almost 100% efficiency.”

“In a process called cellular reprogramming, researchers increase the expression of four genes in skin, blood, or other mature cells to turn them into induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), which can become any of the body’s cell types.”

“Scientists value the method because it allows them to make patient-specific cells in the lab that they can use to study disease—and perhaps someday to treat patients. However, the reprogramming procedure is hit-and-miss. The most efficient methods reprogram only about 10% of mature cells into iPSCs.”

What if scientists could reprogram stems cells right in your body? This concept is not far fetched! A state never produced in a lab before was successful in mice!

Science Daily…

“One of the greatest achievements in recent biomedical research was in 2006 when Shinya Yamanaka managed to create embryonic stem cells (pluripotent stem cells, induced in vitro, or in vitro iPSCs) in a laboratory from adult cells, via a cocktail of just four genes. Yamanaka’s discovery, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Medicine in 2012, opened a new horizon in regenerative medicine.”

“CNIO researchers have taken another step forward, by achieving the same as Yamanaka, but this time within the same organism, in mice, without the need to pass through in vitro culture dishes. Generating these cells within an organism brings this technology even closer to regenerative medicine.

The first challenge for CNIO researchers was to reproduce the Yamanaka experiment in a living being. They chose a mouse as a model organism. Using genetic manipulation techniques, researchers created mice in which Yamanaka’s four genes could be activated at will. When these genes were activated, they observed that the adult cells were able to retreat in their evolutionary development to become embryonic stem cells in multiple tissues and organs.

“María Abad, the lead author of the article and a researcher in Serrano’s group, said: “This change of direction in development has never been observed in nature. We have demonstrated that we can also obtain embryonic stem cells in adult organisms and not only in the laboratory.”

The reprogrammed adult stem cells can also be removed from the body for further study. Unlike origin evolutionary research where scientists are trying to come up with a way to produce life from dead chemicals in a lab in order to take credit on the way nature has been designed, this article says no such thing, what was reprogrammed is not what happens in evolution. Even though evolution was given some props, this was an amazing year for real science that includes adult-stem cell research!

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Scientists Discover More Innovation With Stem Cells

  1. What if scientists could reprogram stems cells right in your body? This concept is not far fetched! A state never produced in a lab before was successful in mice!
    . . . . .
    . . . . . . . .

    We have demonstrated that we can also obtain embryonic stem cells in adult organisms and not only in the laboratory.”

    The advances in adult stem cells is amazing. There is another advantage of adult stem cells—especially embryonic ones—that Michael does not mention.

    Such cells will make it very much easier to duplicate entire human beings. Imagine ordering a clone of yourself from Bayerische Doppelgänger GmbH. Imagine entire “nurseries” of embryos planted like crops in artificial amniotic fluid,, developing until they can be delivered in a few months.

  2. Once again, Michael’s ignorance leads him astray. He emphasizes this statement by the stem-cell researcher—

    “When these genes were activated, they observed that the adult cells were able to retreat in their evolutionary development to become embryonic stem cells in multiple tissues and organs.”

    And turns it into a diatribe against Darwinian evolution—

    ….what was reprogrammed is not what happens in evolution. Even though evolution was given some props….

    This is not what the stem-cell researcher was saying at all. The word “evolution” has several distinct meanings. The stem-cell researcher was not referring to Darwin’s theory of evolution at all. He was employing the general meaning—

    ev·o·lu·tion
    noun
    1.
    any process of formation or growth; development: the evolution of a language; the evolution of the airplane.
    [Dictionary.com

    In this case, the researcher was referring to the “evolution” of an fertilizes egg into to a fully developed embryo; that is, its process of development in the formation of a complete organism. Michael’s ignorance caused him to see only the specialized meaning that ignited his short fuse..

    Michael’s ignorance also extends to the more particular meaning of “evolution” in biology. He fulminates—

    Unlike origin evolutionary research where scientists are trying to come up with a way to produce life from dead chemicals….

    In the biological sense of the word, “evolution presupposes organisms that are already alive and reproducing—

    ev·o·lu·tion
    noun
    ….
    3.
    Biology . change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift.
    [Idem]

    Biological evolution cannot apply to “dead chemicals,” because they have no “gene pool” nor any capability for mutation, selection, drift, nor any other mechanism that drives biological evolution. For that reason, origin of life (OOL) research is separate from evolution. OOL is strictly a chemical process, in accordance with the laws of chemistry. To call OOL an evolutionary process, one would also have to call, for example, the formation of limestone from calcium oxide, water, and carbon dioxide.[1] an “evolution.”

    Yet again, Michael’s ignorance of not only evolution but also of the English language cause him to fall flat on his face.

    ============================

    [1] CaO+H2O –> Ca(OH)2, then Ca(OH)2+CO2 –> CaCO3+H2O.

    ,

  3. Michael prefers to get his science news second-hand. The primary paper is :Rais, et al., “Deterministic direct programming of somatic cells to pluripotency,” Nature 502:65-70. The same issue carries a news-article summary, :”Close encounters with full potential,” id., pp41-42.

    Also, Michael’s link to Science Daily is incorrect. Try “Embryonic Stem Cells Produced in Living Adult Organisms”.

    The title of Michael’s post is puzzling. How do stem cells produce “innovation”? Perhaps he should look up this word in the dictionary.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s