Page 1,721«..1020..1,7201,7211,7221,723..1,7301,740..»

Home | Stem Cells | University of Nebraska Medical Center

Posted: August 1, 2016 at 7:55 am

The latest Techniques in Stem Cell Research

Stem cells offer exciting therapeutic potential....

Since its establishment in 1880, UNMC has instituted a history of monumental discoveries that have altered the fields of medicine and saved thousands of lives. UNMCs mission to improve the health of Nebraska through premier educational programs, innovative research, the highest quality patient care, and outreach to underserved populations has inherently forged the development of an institute that offers innovative therapies and extraordinary care.

Faculty and staff at the University of Nebraska Medical Center are committed to the development of their programs to continue to pioneer leadership in areas such as research, education, transplant, cancer therapy, and many others. UNMC also has a distinguished national and international reputation in stem cell transplantation for a variety of diseases. One area in particular, developed by UNMCs own faculty, has helped the university to become a world leader in leukemia and lymphoma therapy. Following some 20 years of basic science research around the world and gradual refinement of clinically applied transplantation, the first patients at UNMC were transplanted with bone marrow cells in 1983. Techniques pioneered at UNMC using peripheral blood derived stem cells have also become an important part of the clinical care and treatment at the university.

Learn more about Stem Cell work at UNMC

Link:

Home | Stem Cells | University of Nebraska Medical Center

Posted in Nebraska Stem Cells | Comments Off on Home | Stem Cells | University of Nebraska Medical Center

What Can I Eat If I Have Diabetes

Posted: August 1, 2016 at 7:51 am

Share:

Are you constantly asking yourself, "What can I eat?" It's time to stop worrying! Living with diabetes doesn't have to mean feeling deprived. We'll help you learn to balance your meals and make the healthiest food choices.

Once you get the hang of eating a healthy diet, you can relax and dig in to a wide variety of delicious meals and snacks.

A great way to get started is with the special meal planning bundle available at shopdiabetes.org.

Learn the best and worst choices from each food group, so youll know what to focus on for meals and snacks.

How much and what type of carbohydrate containing foods you eat makes a difference in managing diabetes.

Let us guide you with quick meal ideas, healthy snack choices and tips for eating out.

Supercharge your meal plan with these ten foods full of vitamins, minerals, and fiber.

Take the time to plan before you shop, stock your kitchen so everything you need for a quick meal is on hand.

Learn about drinking alcohol if you have diabetes.

Learn ways to manage your diabetes while eating out.

Are grains and starchy vegetables good or bad?

Fill half your plate with non-starchy vegetables for a healthy meal.

Protein foods are an important part of a diabetes meal plan. Learn about your best choices.

Dont forget that the beverages you drink can also have an effect on your weight and blood glucose as you work to control your diabetes.

We Can Help:

Enter your ZIP to find out whats going on near you.

Enroll in our FREE Living With Type 2 Diabetes program today for trusted info, recipes and more!

Read more:

What Can I Eat If I Have Diabetes

Posted in Diabetes | Comments Off on What Can I Eat If I Have Diabetes

StemCONN

Posted: July 31, 2016 at 5:44 am

Nearly 500 scientists, business leaders, and students met April 27 in Hartford for StemConn2015. Held every two years, StemConn is Connecticuts premier conference on Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine research.

The enthusiastic audience, the largest ever for a StemConn conference, was welcomed by Connecticut officials, including Governor Dannel P. Malloy, U.S. Senator Chris Murphy, U.S. Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro, Connecticut State Representative Lonnie Reed, and Hartford Mayor Pedro E. Segarra.StemConn2015 marked the anniversary of Connecticuts bold decision 10 years ago to encourage stem cell research via $100 million in state funding, giving Connecticut researchers a jump start in a critical biomedical area. Today Connecticut is a world-leader in stem cell research, and UConn, Wesleyan, and Yale each have significant programs in place.

The expansion of research towards clinical developments in this area has been remarkable, said UConns Dr. Caroline Dealy, organizing chair of the conference. We heard from researchers who are using stem cells to restore vision, to build bio-scaffolds, and to one day treat diseases like spinal injury, lung disease, and bone defects.

Researchers are also understanding how the bodys own stem cells may be stimulated to heal tissue damage. Much of the research in Regenerative Medicine is aimed at using adult stem cells now, Dealy said.More than 100 college and high school students participated in the StemConn2015 event as part of an education and public outreach initiative. Graduate students and fellows presented an extensive poster session, and students had the opportunity to meet with the invited speakers over lunch. Our students had a fantastic time at the Conference, said Tom Vrabel, a teacher at the Trumbull Agriscience Biotechnology High School. Exposures such as this can change their life paths.

This years event featured a special Commercialization and Translation session highlighting Connecticuts entrepreneurial activities in bioscience. Dr. Susan Froshauer, president and CEO of CURE, the states bioscience cluster, points out that that the states original $100 million has proved a fertile investment. We have tripled that, in terms of the amount of money that these researchers have brought into Connecticut, Froshauer says.

Original post:

StemCONN

Posted in Connecticut Stem Cells | Comments Off on StemCONN

Stem Cell Therapy for Urological Issues | Kansas RMC

Posted: July 29, 2016 at 7:49 pm

Urology is one of the fieldsat the forefront of stem cell therapy research.

Interstitial Cystitis / Painful Bladder Syndrome

Millions of patients suffer from Interstitial Cystitis/Painful Bladder Syndrome. This severe and debilitating condition has historically been confused with other bladder pathology which must be ruled out, making IC difficult to diagnose. Currently, Interstitial Cystitis/PBS is defined as an unpleasant sensation, (pain, pressure, discomfort) perceived to be related to the urinary bladder, associated with lower urinary tract symptoms of more than 6 weeks duration, in the absence of infection or other identifiable causes. (2009 new American IC/PBS Guidelines). Although there are several theories to explain IC, the exact cause remains unclear. Many patients with IC have the biomarker APF (antiproliferative factor) in their urine, which inhibits bladder cell proliferation, making healing of the bladder lining much more difficult. Recent research indicates IC may be related to systemic neurosensitization and neuroinflammation that occurs within the bladder and in other organ systems. Regardless of the cause, the end result of IC is damage to the urothelium and bladder muscle that can run the spectrum from mild mucosal irritation to deep Hunners ulcers.

InterstitialCystitisandadiposederivedmesenchymalstemcells

Adipose derived adult (non-embryonic) mesenchymal stem cells are currently being investigated for use in degenerative conditions that result in damage to various organs and systems. These cells have the ability to seek out areas of injury and regeneration and assist in the repair of nerves, blood vessels, muscle, fat, cartilage, bone, and many other structures. These cells are naturally recruited by cytokines (SDF-1 stromal derived factor one, HGF hepatocyte growth factor, and platelets), to sites of inflammation, ischemia, hypoxia, or injury and they assist in the healing process either by directly forming needed cells or secreting chemical messengers that promote healing. Stem cells are mobilized naturally from bone marrow when the body is healing but they are also found dormant, but available, in human adipose tissue. These stem cells from fat are abundant in levels up to 2500 times greater than those found in bone marrow and research indicates that the fat derived stem cells have equivalent regeneration potential to the bone marrow cells. Also, stem cell treatment success appears to relate to the number of cells used and this gives adipose cells a significant potential advantage to regenerate human tissues. Mesenchymal stem cells have been used extensively around the world in the successful treatment of orthopedic, cardiac, pulmonary, and neurologic disease in both humans and veterinary models. We have evidence that adipose derived stem cells can differentiate into functional smooth muscle cells and, therefore, we think that bladder repair by stem cells may be possible in IC patients. A recent study in mice with bladder outlet obstruction demonstrated that florescent protein labeled MSCs (mesenchymal stem cells) injected intravenously into test subjects incorporated into bladder muscle resulting in decreased hypoxia, hypertrophy, and fibrosis and increased blood flow. Nine out of ten mice who received MSCs had improved bladder compliance.

We know that patients with IC demonstrate abnormal cell signaling and cytokine release. For this reason, we believe that stem cell treatment may be helpful for interstitial cystitis patients who exhibit mucosal and smooth muscular damage. We have developed a protocol to treat patients with IC of various stages with adipose derived stem cells. Our protocol uses high doses of stem cells injected intravenously and also intra-vesically (directly into the bladder lumen) and, in some cases, directly into trigger points in the pelvic floor. We have evidence that intravesical instillation of adipose derived stem cells into mice effectively shows morphological and phenotypic evidence of smooth muscle incorporation into the bladder wall three months after instillation.

Kansas Regenerative Medicine Center is using high dose autologous adipose derived stem cells for the investigational treatment of various degenerative diseases. The use of autologous cells ensures that the patients receive cells from only their own bodies. The technology to isolate the adipose derived stem cells has been obtained from Korea and is state of the art. All studies are patient funded and not approved by the FDA. We have initiated a pilot study to investigate the effectiveness of high dose adipose derived stem cells on interstitial cystitis. Only adult adipose derived stem cells are used, since embryonic stem cells have the potential to form rare tumors and have ethical considerations. The stem cells are obtained from a mini liposuction-like procedure performed under local anesthetic. Stem cells are isolated on site from the patients own fat and then deployed in our facility within 90 minutes. Regenerative healing naturally takes time and we do not expect immediate improvement in symptoms. Patients will be followed closely through our research registry and carefully collected data to help establish effectiveness of our treatment protocols.

See the original post:

Stem Cell Therapy for Urological Issues | Kansas RMC

Posted in Kansas Stem Cells | Comments Off on Stem Cell Therapy for Urological Issues | Kansas RMC

Hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells, generation of induced …

Posted: July 29, 2016 at 7:49 pm

Blood. 2011 May 5; 117(18): 47734777.

1Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN;

2Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN;

3Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD; and

4Department of Medical and Molecular Genetics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN

Received 2011 Jan 12; Accepted 2011 Mar 1.

Cryopreservation of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) and hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs) is crucial for cord blood (CB) banking and transplantation. We evaluated recovery of functional HPC cryopreserved as mononuclear or unseparated cells for up to 23.5 years compared with prefreeze values of the same CB units. Highly efficient recovery (80%-100%) was apparent for granulocyte-macrophage and multipotential hematopoietic progenitors, although some collections had reproducible low recovery. Proliferative potential, response to multiple cytokines, and replating of HPC colonies was extensive. CD34+ cells isolated from CB cryopreserved for up to 21 years had long-term ( 6 month) engrafting capability in primary and secondary immunodeficient mice reflecting recovery of long-term repopulating, self-renewing HSCs. We recovered functionally responsive CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes, generated induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells with differentiation representing all 3 germ cell lineages in vitro and in vivo, and detected high proliferative endothelial colony forming cells, results of relevance to CB biology and banking.

The first cord blood (CB) transplantation saved the life of a young patient with Fanconi anemia using HLA-matched sibling CB cells,1 a procedure made possible by identification and cryopreservation of transplantable hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs) and hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) in CB.2 More than 20 000 CB transplantations have treated the same malignant and nonmalignant disorders as bone marrow (BM).38 CB transplantation is possible because of CB banks, and how long CB can be stored in a cryopreserved state with efficient recovery of HSCs and HPCs is critical for CB banking. We reported highly efficient recovery of CB HPCs after 5,9 10,10 and 1511 years, and recovery of HSCs after 15 years.11 We now report efficient recovery of functional HPCs up to 21-23.5 years, with more in depth studies on CB HSC engraftment in immune deficient mice, recovery of responsive T cells, generation of induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells,1214 and detection of endothelial colony forming cells (ECFCs).15

CB cells were scheduled for discard.2 The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Indiana University (IU). Cryopreservation, thawing, and plating were as reported.2,911 CB was assessed within 36 hours of collection. Cells were either separated into a mononuclear (MNC) fraction (Ficoll-Hypaque; Pharmacia) and aliquoted into cryotubes (Nalge Nunc) or left unseparated and aliquoted into cryo-freezer bags,2,16,17 in 10% Dimethylsulfoxide and 10% autologous plasma for eventual analysis of HPC recovery. Percent recovery from MNC or unseparated cryopreserved cells was based on total prefreeze cells per volume of the exact same CB unit.2,911 After thaw of unseparated cells, CD34+ cells were magnetic-bead separated11 for HSC engraftment and iPS cell generation studies. CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes were separated from the CD34+-depleted cells and stimulated on plates precoated with anti-CD3 (OKT3, 0.5 g/mL) and anti-CD28 (clone CD28.2, 1 g/mL) with 10% FBS, 50M 2ME and 10ng/mL IL-15 as described.18 Immune-deficient mouse assay for human CB donor chimerism was as reported,11 except that recipients were NOD/SCID/IL-2Rgnull (NSG).19

At IU, CD34+ cells isolated from thawed, unseparated cells were grown with 10% FBS, 10 ng/mL human (h) SCF, 10 ng h Flt3-ligand, and 10 ng h Thrombopoietin/mL for 3 days. At day 4, cells were spin-infected (2200 rpm; 45 minutes) with concentrated lentiviral vectors Sox2-Oct4-EGFP and cMyc-Klaf4 (pc DNA-HIV-CS-CGW, provided by Dr P. Zoltick, Children's Hospital, Philadelphia; supplemental Figure 1, available on the Blood Web site; see the Supplemental Materials link at the top of the online article) in -MEM medium with polybrene (Sigma-Aldrich). Medium was replaced at 6 days with the cytokines noted in this paragraph. At day 7, cells were transferred to mitotically inactivated murine embryonic fibroblasts (MEFs) and cultured as for human embryonic stem cells (hESCs).20 iPS cells were also generated at Johns Hopkins using retroviruses expressing Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, and c-Myc.12 ECFC assay was performed with MNCs isolated from thawed, unseparated CB.15

We show efficient recovery of HPCs from 23 different collections of MNCs thawed from vials after 21-23.5 years (A) compared with the exact same unit's precryopreservation numbers, a recovery similar to 10- and 15-year thaws, that assessed the same plus additional CB units. A range of recoveries was evident, but values were similar whether the same samples were assessed 3 times over 3 years, 2 times over 1-3 years, or twice on the same day (data not shown). Recovery of CFU-GM and CFU-GEMM from unseparated cryopreserved cells (N = 3) was greater than 80% (data not shown), and consistent with recovery from MNCs. It is not clear why some samples resulted in low-efficiency recovery, but assessing the recovery of stored cells by thawing a small sample before their possible use in a clinical transplantation setting could help identify low-recovery CB units, and a decision made as to whether or not to use that unit. Proliferation of HPCs was high (B) and within range for fresh CB.2,912 Thawed CB is highly responsive to increased colonies from immature HPCs when GM-CSF plus SCF and/or FL are used to stimulate them, compared with that of only GM-CSF (C) demonstrating retention of immature HPCs.9 Thawed CB contains HPC colonies that can be replated (D), suggesting maintenance of HPCs with limited self-renewal capacity.21 Secondary CFU-GM/M colonies formed from single replated CFU-GM/M colonies. CFU-GEMM colonies gave rise to secondary colonies of CFU-GEMM, erythroid progenitors, CFU-GM, and CFU-M.

Recovery of nucleated cellularity, HPCs, HSCs, and immune cells after cryopreservation and long-term frozen storage of CB. (A) Comparative percent recovery of nucleated cells, CFU-GM, and CFU-GEMM compared with prefreeze numbers for 10, 15, and 21-23.5 ...

Using different CB collections cryopreserved as unseparated cells, isolated CD34+ cells efficiently engrafted NSG mice for 6-7 months (E). In 2 experiments, BM cells from engrafted chimeric mice repopulated secondary mice for 6 months. While we demonstrated engrafting capability of thawed CB after 15 years of storage using first generation NOD/SCID mice,11 those mice did not allow long-term primary engraftment or secondary repopulation. Thus, the current study greatly extends previous findings, and demonstrates recovery of long-term repopulating and self-renewing HSCs. We could not calculate percent recovery of HSCs as this assay was not available when cells were cryopreserved, but this engraftment is similar to fresh CB HSCs.11

Attaining vigorous T-cell responses against common viral pathogens is critical for survival after CB transplantation.22 CB T cells are almost exclusively naive cells, with few effector or memory cells.18 CB T cells are immature compared with adult T cells because of impaired cytokine production and diminished lytic activity.22,23 To verify immune capability, CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes, purified from unseparated CB stored up to 21 years, were activated as assessed by CD3/CD28-induced expression of CD25 (F). This demonstrated recovery of functional T-cell subsets.

iPS cells are generated from different cell sources,24,25 including fresh CB,1214 and CB cryopreserved for 5-8 years.12,14 We generated iPS cells from CB cryopreserved for up to 21 years using Oct4, KLF-4, Sox2, and c-Myc reprogramming with lentiviral vector transduction of CD34+ cells at IU (A). iPS cell colonies stained positive for OCT4, NANOG, TRA-1-60, SSEA4, and alkaline phosphatase (B). Quantitative RT-PCR demonstrated reprogramming via expression of endogenous OCT4, SOX2, and NANOG in comparison to H9 ESC cell line and CD34+ cells from which iPS cells were generated (C). Unmethylated OCT4 promoter in 2 iPS cell lines generated from thawed CB in comparison to enhanced methylation for CD34+ cells from which iPS cell colonies were derived (D), demonstrates early stages of produced cells. Embryoid bodies developed from iPS cells after removal from MEFs (E), and expressed ectodermal, mesodermal, and endodermal proteins (E). Moreover, injection of iPS cell colonies into testis capsules of immune-deficient mice demonstrated teratomas with ectoderm, mesoderm, and endoderm, confirming reprogramming. Generation of iPS cells12 at Johns Hopkins with 21-year frozen CB from a different collection produced cells expressing TRA-1-60, SSEA4, NANOG, and OCT4 (data not shown), and produced teratomas12 with expression of endoderm, mesoderm, and ectoderm markers (G). These CB-derived iPS cells were differentiated in vitro (H). Efficiency of iPS cell generation from thawed CB ranged from 0.027%-0.05% per CD34+ cell, similar to cultured CD34+ cells from freshly isolated or shorter-term frozen CB.12 This reprogramming efficiency appears higher than from human adult blood or fibroblastic cells.12,14 If iPS cells are found to be of clinical utility, which is not yet clear,24,25 HLA-typed CB stored in banks could serve as a source of such typed cells.

Reprogramming of 21-year-old frozen human CB CD34+ cells to iPS cells (A-H) and recovery of ECFCs (I). The phase contrast images in panels B (FCB-iPS and AP stain), E (top left image), and I were viewed using a Zeiss Axiovert 25 CFL inverted microscope ...

High proliferative ECFCs have been identified in CB.15 MNCs from thawed, unseparated CB stored frozen for up to 21 years formed ECFC colonies, but their size was smaller than colonies from fresh CB (I). ECFC colony numbers from thawed CB (2-5/107 mononuclear cells) were 1/5 to 1/10 numbers from fresh CB, even when colonies from fresh cells versus those frozen and stored for up to 3-6 months were assayed. Thus, the freezing procedure that works well for efficient recovery of HPCs may not be optimal for storage of ECFCs. However, ECFCs that can be cryopreserved and recovered may be of value for regenerative medicine, if clinical applicability is proven.24 Thus, recovery of HSCs, HPCs, and other early cell types bodes well for CB banking and use.

These studies were supported by National Institutes of Health Public Health Service grants NIH R01 HL56416 and NIH R01 HL67384, and a project in NHLBI PO1 HL053586 to H.E.B., NIH R01 HL073781 to L.C., and a grant from the Riley Children's Foundation to M.C.Y. Z.Y. was supported by NIH T32 grant HL007525. The IU production of lentiviral vector was funded by NIH P40RR024928 to K.C., and S.W. is funded on a faculty recruitment grant from NIH (P30 HL101337).

The online version of this article contains a data supplement.

The publication costs of this article were defrayed in part by page charge payment. Therefore, and solely to indicate this fact, this article is hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 USC section 1734.

Contribution: H.E.B., M.-R.L., N.P., Z.Y., S.W., K.C., L.C., and M.C.Y. designed experiments; H.E.B., M.-R.L., G.H., S.C., N.P., Y.-J.K., C.M., Z.Y., S.W., K.C., L.C., and M.C.Y. performed research and analyzed and interpreted data; H.E.B. wrote the paper, and H.E.B., M.-R.L., N.P., Y.-J.K., Z.Y., S.W., K.C., L.C., and M.C.Y. edited the paper.

Conflict-of-interest disclosure: H.E.B. is on the Medical Scientific Advisory Board of Corduse, a cord blood banking company. M.C.Y. is a cofounder and consultant to EndGenitor Technologies Inc. The remaining authors declare no competing financial interests.

Correspondence: Hal E. Broxmeyer, PhD, Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, 950 West Walnut St, R2-302, Indianapolis, IN 46202-5181; e-mail: ude.iupui@yemxorbh.

8. Broxmeyer HE, Smith FO. Cord Blood Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation. In: Appelbaum FR, Forman SJ, Negrin RS, Blume KG, editors. Thomas' Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation. 4th ed. West Sussex, United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell; 2009. pp. 559576. Sec 4, Chap 39.

16. English D, Cooper S, Douglas G, Broxmeyer HE. Collection and processing of cord blood for preservation and hematopoietic transplantation. In: Areman E, Deeg HJ, Sacher RA, editors. Bone marrow and stem cell processing: A manual of current techniques. Philadelphia, PA: FA Davis Co; 1992. pp. 383384.

Read the rest here:

Hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells, generation of induced ...

Posted in Indiana Stem Cells | Comments Off on Hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells, generation of induced …

Stem Cell FAQ – Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA

Posted: July 27, 2016 at 2:47 am

Why are doctors and scientists so excited about stem cells?

Stem cells have potential in many different areas of health and medical research.

Adult and embryonic stem cells differ in the type of cells that they can develop into.Embryonic stem cells can become all cell types of the body (they arepluripotent). Adult stem cells are found in mature tissues (bone marrow, skin, brain, etc.) and give rise to other cell types from their tissue or origin (they are are multipotent). For example, adult blood stem cells give rise to red blood cells, white blood cells and platelets.

Adult stem cells are thought to exist in every type of tissue in the body. But, to date, the isolation of many types of adult stem cells has been limited. Hematopoietic (blood) stem cells are readily available via bone marrow aspiration. But stem cells for solid organs such as liver or brain have proven more difficult to identify and derive. The hope is that hESCs can be used to derive every type of adult stem cell in the body and allow research that is currently not possible.

Embryonic stem cells are isolated from 3 to 5 day old human embryos at the blastocyst stage. The blastocyst is a hollow microscopic cluster of several hundred undifferentiated cells.

This is a culture of hESCs derived from a single embryo. Because stem cells can self-replicate, just a few hESCs can give rise to a whole population of identical hESCs, or a cell line.

Once established, a cell line can be grown in the laboratory indefinitely and cells may be frozen for later use or distributed to other researchers. Because each cell line has its own distinct genetic footprint, researchers are often interested in using the same cell line for a number of related experiments.

No. At this point, the promise is huge, but hESC research is still in its early stages. Human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research only began in 1998, when a group led by Dr. James Thomson at the University of Wisconsin developed a technique to isolate and grow the cells.

In late January 2009, the California-based company Geron received FDA clearance to begin the first human clinical trial of cells derived from human embryonic stem cells. View Geron press release

In contrast, research with adult stem cells such as blood-forming stem cells in bone marrow (called hematopoietic stem cells, or HSCs) has been active for over decades. And this research has resulted in treatment of patients; for example, bone marrow (stem cell) transplants have been conducted for over 40 years.

In addition, studies with a limited number of patients have demonstrated the clinical potential of adult stem cells in the treatment of other human diseases that include diabetes and advanced kidney cancer.

Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS cells) are cells that began as normal adult cells (for example, a skin cell) and were engineered (induced) by scientists to become pluripotent, that is, able to form all cell types of the body. This process is often called 'reprogramming.' While iPS cells and embryonic stem cells share many characteristics they are not identical. Scientists are currently exploring whether they differ in clinically significant ways.

The technology used to generate iPS cells holds great promise for creating patient- and disease-specific cell lines for research purposes. These cells are already useful tools for drug development and scientists hope to use them in transplantation medicine. However, additional research is needed before the reprogramming techniques can be used to generate stem cells suitable for safe and effective therapies.

Somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), is a technique in which the nucleus of a somatic cell (any cell of the body except sperm and egg cells) is injected, or transplanted, into an egg, that has had its nucleus removed. The product of SCNT has the same genetic material as the somatic cell donor.

Yes. SCNT is a technique of cloning. The product of SCNT is nearly genetically identical to the somatic cell used in the process. (Of note, the product of SCNT is not technically 100% identical in that the cytoplasm of the oocyte includes mitochondrial DNA.) While SCNT is considered cloning, it is important to differentiate between therapeutic and reproductive cloning. The following FAQ addresses these differences.

Reproductive cloning includes the placement of the product of SCNT into a uterus for the purpose of a live birth. The resulting organism would, in theory, be the genetic copy of the somatic cell donor. Reproductive cloning has been performed in animals for many years and is burdened by many technical and biological problems. Only about 1 percent of all the eggs that receive donor DNA can develop into normal surviving clones. Therapeutic cloning uses SCNT for the sole purpose of deriving cells for research, and potentially in the future for therapy. In therapeutic cloning, the product of SCNT is not placed into a uterus and hence a live birth is never a possibility. Therapeutic cloning provides two potential benefits.

Yes. Massachusetts state law that was enacted in May 2005 allows hESC research and it allows the derivation of hESCs from embryos that were created for reproductive purposes and are no longer needed for reproduction and from somatic cell nuclear transfer.

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) issued guidelines for hESC research in April 2005, and subsequently updated those guidelines in 2007 and 2008. The current guidelines contain detailed recommendations with regard to many aspects of hESC research, including:

No. IRB approval is required for:

Until recently, the federal government limited its funding to specific hESCs derived before August 9, 2001. Specifically, federal funds were only allowed for research on hESCs listed on the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Registry, and on derivative products from hESCs on the NIH Registry. On March 9, 2009, President Obama signed an executive order clearing the way for the NIH and other federal agencies to fund research using all kinds of hESCs.

Human embryonic stem cell research at the Center for Regenerative Medicine has been supportedin partby private philanthropic donations. These donations allowed us to support a wide range of research activities that could not have been supported from other sources such as NIH funding. In the future, we expect to receive support for eligible activities from NIH and other funding agencies.

The Center for Regenerative Medicine depends upon philanthropic support. To find out how you can help accelerate research and discovery, please click here.

The Center for Regenerative Medicine is dedicated to understanding how tissues are formed and may be repaired in settings of injury. Embedded at Mass General Hospital, the Center's primary goal is to develop novel therapies to regenerate damaged tissues and thereby overcome debilitating chronic disease. The success of this effort requires a cohesive team of scientists and clinicians with diverse areas of expertise, but with a shared mission and dedication to the larger goal.

The Center for Regenerative Medicine has extensive interactions with other investigators at MGH and in the broader Harvard-MIT community. The Center helped galvanize the establishment of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute (HSCI), which is co-directed by Dr. Scadden and Dr. Douglas Melton of Harvard's Department of Stem Cell and Regenerative Biologyand the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. As an important confederated partner of HSCI, the Center brings specific features that augment other elements of HSCI, including unique stem cell clinical investigation expertise and ongoing collaborative clinical trials using stem cell transplantation. The Center emphasizes technologies that will ultimately be critical for the success of stem cell based medicine, including bioengineering, biomaterials expertise, close links to in vivo imaging capability and its GMP facility for sophisticated cell manipulation.

Excerpt from:

Stem Cell FAQ - Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA

Posted in Massachusetts Stem Cells | Comments Off on Stem Cell FAQ – Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA

Stem Cell Facts – University of Massachusetts Medical School

Posted: July 27, 2016 at 2:47 am

What Are Embryonic Stem Cells?

Embryonic stem (ES) cells are a collection of cells found only in very early development which are the precursors to every celltypein the human body. The vast majority of cells in the body (somatic cells) fall into specific classes or types, such as muscle, bone and neurons, each of which have unique characteristics and functions. However, these cells are not interchangeable(a muscle cell cannot become a neuron) and most of these cells have lost the ability to multiply to create new cells. ES cells differ from all other cells in two important ways. First, they can be induced tochange, or differentiate, into virtually any cell type. Second, unlike somatic cells which have finite lifespans, ES cell can grow indefinitely in culture. These two unique characteristics give ES cells enormous potential to medicine and science.

Embryonic stem cells are important to medicine because of their ability to change into other cell types. This ability means that ES cells have the potential to repair damaged organs and replace cells that do not function properly. Since they can multiply indefinitely, the large numbers of cells necessary to repair or replace these tissues can be produced. Thus, the hope is that ES cells can be a renewable source of replacement cells that can be used to treat a number of medical problems including Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease, strokes, burns, spinal cord damage and heart disease.

Recent publications have described the derivation of ES-like induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells from adult mouse and human cells(Nakagawa et al., 2008;Takahashi et al., 2007;Yu et al., 2007). These researchers introduced specific sets of genes encoding transcription factors which are normally expressed in undifferentiated ES cells. The expression of these genes resulted in thereprogramming of the adult cells to a more ES-like or pluripotent state. While the initial studies indicate that these cells share characteristics of true ES cells, more detailed work is needed to determine how closely they resemble ES cells. In addition, the reintroduction of these genes can have adverse consequences. For instance, the use of retroviruses and the potential for reactivation of introduced genes such as c-myc and Oct-4 can increase the risk of cancer. These issues will need to be addressed if iPS technology will have clinical applications.

The human body has a relatively small number of cells, called adult stem cells that are capable of differentiating into a limited range of cell types. For instance, blood stem cells are capable of changing into a number or different types of blood cells. These adult ES are also of enormous importance to medicine. However, they have limitations that ES cells do not. First, they are limited in the number of types of cells into which they can change. For instance, blood stem cells cannot form bone. In addition, unlike ES cells adult stem cells do not appear to have the same capacity to multiply indefinitely. They have also been more difficult to grow in the laboratory. So, while adult stem cells are important, they cannot be viewed at this time as a replacement for ES cells. Research into all types of stem cells is needed in order to advance medicines ability to treat disease.

Types of Stem Cells

hES Cells

SCNT ES Cells

iPS Cells

Adult Stem Cells

Derivation Method

Removal of cells from ICM of blastocyst embryo from IVF.

Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer. Transfer of somatic cell nucleus to enucleated egg, development to blastocyst, removal of ICM.

Reprogramming of somatic cells by introduction of specific regulatory factor genes.

Isolation from adult tissues.

Characteristics

Differentiate into all cell types.

Excess of IVF embryos exist.

Differentiate into all cell types.

Stem cells can be matched to patient

ES cell like characteristics.

Stem cells can be matched to patient

Doesn't require embryos.

Successful treatments demonstrated.

Stem cells can be matched to patient

Limitations

Limited number of lines available for federally funded research.

Immune rejection issues

Risk of tumors (teratomas) from transplanting undifferentiated cells.

Requires use of embryo.

Risk of tumors (teratomas) from transplanting undifferentiated cells.

Eggs difficult to obtain.

Unknown if cells can differentiate into all cell types.

Risk of tumors (teratomas) from transplanting undifferentiated cells and from expression of introduced genes.

Cells not found in all tissues.

Produce a limited number of cell types.

Difficult to identify, isolate and grow.

Top

Stem Cell Basics Prepared by the National Institutes of Health, this primer on stem cells answers a number of fundamental questions about the properties and potential uses of embryonic and adult stem cells with a glossary of terms and illustrations.

Tell Me About Stem Cells This site, created by Harvard and MIT, provides basic information about stem cells in plain language with illustrations.

Understanding Stem Cells Developed and published by the National Academy of Sciences, this free booklet (available as a 1.13 MB PDF, 24 pages) provides information on what stem cells are and why stem cell research is important, as well as the ethical and legal issues surrounding stem cells.

EuroStemCell This website presents information and educational resources about stem cells from a European perspective.

National Institutes of Health Stem Cell FAQs This page contains a wealth of information, from basic questions about stem cells, to research and potential clinical uses of stem cells as well as US government policies.

ISSCR Stem Cell FAQs Prepared by the International Society for Stem Cell Research, this page addresses a number of basic questions about embryonic and adult stem cells, their origins and potential uses.

MedlinePlus: Stem Cells This site offers a number of useful links for those seeking health-related information about embryonic and adult stem cells; from basic information to disease specific sites to links to clinical trials.

A Closer Look at Stem Cell Treatments This site is designed to arm patients, their families and doctors with information they need to make decisions about stem cell treatments. The content of this site is based on recommendations from the ISSCR's Task Force on Unproven Stem Cell Treatments.

21st Century Snake Oil A CBS 60 minutes story from 2010 that serves as a warning about unscrupulous stem cell therapies.

Top

Read the original here:

Stem Cell Facts - University of Massachusetts Medical School

Posted in Massachusetts Stem Cells | Comments Off on Stem Cell Facts – University of Massachusetts Medical School

The Stem Cellar | The Official Blog of CIRM, California’s …

Posted: July 26, 2016 at 6:06 am

Lessons learned from babies with heart failure could now help adults

Inspiration can sometimes come from the most unexpected of places. For English researcher Stephen Westaby it came from seeing babies who had heart attacks bounce back and recover. It led Westaby to a new line of research that could offer hope to people who have had a heart attack.

Westaby, a researcher at the John Radcliffe hospital in Oxford, England, found that implanting a novel kind of stem cell in the hearts of people undergoing surgery following a heart attack had a surprisingly significant impact on their recovery.

Westaby got his inspiration from studies showing babies who had a heart attack and experienced scarring on their heart, were able to bounce back and, by the time they reached adolescence, had no scarring. He wondered if it was because the babies own heart stem cells were able to repair the damage.

Scarring is a common side effect of a heart attack and affects the ability of the heart to be able to pump blood efficiently around the body. As a result of that diminished pumping ability people have less energy, and are at increased risk of further heart problems. For years it was believed this scarring was irreversible. This study, published in the Journal of Cardiovascular Translational Research, suggests it may not be.

Westaby and his team implanted what they describe as a novel mesenchymal precursor (iMP) type of stem cell in the hearts of patients who were undergoing heart bypass surgery following a heart attack. The cells were placed in parts of the heart that showed sizeable scarring and poor blood flow.

Two years later the patients showed a 30 percent improvement in heart function, a 40 percent reduction in scar size, and a 70 percent improvement in quality of life.

In an interview with the UK Guardian newspaper, Westaby admitted he was not expecting such a clear cut benefit:

Quite frankly it was a big surprise to find the area of scar in the damaged heart got smaller,

Of course it has to be noted that the trial was small, only involving 11 patients. Nonetheless the findings are important and impressive. Westaby and his team now hope to do a much larger study.

CIRM is funding a clinical trial with Capricor that is taking a similar approach, using stem cells to rejuvenate the hearts of patients who have had heart attacks.

Fred Lesikar, one of the patients in the first phase of that trial, experienced a similar benefit to those in the English trial and told us about it in our Stories of Hope.

Like Loading...

A healthy T cell

Here are some stem cell stories that caught our eye this past week. Some are groundbreaking science, others are of personal interest to us, and still others are just fun.

Directing the creation of T cells. To paraphrase the GOP Presidential nominee, any sane person LOVES, LOVES LOVES their T cells, in a HUGE way, so HUGE. They scamper around the body getting rid of viruses and the tiny cancers we all have in us all the time. A CIRM-funded team at CalTech has worked out the steps our genetic machinery must take to make more of them, a first step in letting physicians turn up the action of our immune systems.

We have known for some time the identity of the genetic switch that is the last, critical step in turning blood stem cells into T cells, but nothing in our body is as simple as a single on-off event. The Caltech team isolated four genetic factors in the path leading to that main switch and, somewhat unsuspected, they found out those four steps had to be activated sequentially, not all at the same time. They discovered the path by engineering mouse cells so that the main T cell switch, Bcl11b, glows under a microscope when it is turned on.

We identify the contributions of four regulators of Bcl11b, which are all needed for its activation but carry out surprisingly different functions in enabling the gene to be turned on, said Ellen Rothenberg, the senior author in a university press release picked up by Innovations Report. Its interestingthe gene still needs the full quorum of transcription factors, but we now find that it also needs them to work in the right order.

Video primer on stem cells in the brain. In conjunction with an article in its August issue, Scientific American posted a video from the Brain Forum in Switzerland of Elena Cattaneo of the University of Milan explaining the basics of adult versus pluripotent stem cells, and in particular how we are thinking about using them to repair diseases in the brain.

The 20-minute talk gives a brief review of pioneers who stood alone in unmarked territory. She asks how can stem cells be so powerful; and answers by saying they have lots of secrets and those secrets are what stem cell scientist like her are working to unravel. She notes stem cells have never seen a brain, but if you show them a few factors they can become specialized nerves. After discussing collaborations in Europe to grow replacement dopamine neurons for Parkinsons disease, she went on to describe her own effort to do the same thing in Huntingtons disease, but in this case create the striatal nerves lost in that disease.

The video closes with a discussion of how basic stem cell research can answer evolutionary questions, in particular how genetic changes allowed higher organisms to develop more complex nervous systems.

CIRM Science Officers Kelly Shepard and Kent Fitzgerald

A stem cell review that hits close to home. IEEE Pulse, a publication for scientists who mix engineering and medicine and biology, had one of their reporters interview two of our colleagues on CIRMs science team. They asked senior science officers Kelly Shepard and Kent Fitzgerald to reflect on how the stem cell field has progressed based on their experience working to attract top researchers to apply for our grants and watching our panel of outside reviewers select the top 20 to 30 percent of each set of applicants.

One of the biggest changes has been a move from animal stem cell models to work with human stem cells, and because of CIRMs dedicated and sustained funding through the voter initiative Proposition 71, California scientists have led the way in this change. Kelly described examples of how mouse and human systems are different and having data on human cells has been critical to moving toward therapies.

Kelly and Kent address several technology trends. They note how quickly stem cell scientists have wrapped their arms around the new trendy gene editing technology CRISPR and discuss ways it is being used in the field. They also discuss the important role of our recently developed ability to perform single cell analysis and other technologies like using vessels called exosomes that carry some of the same factors as stem cells without having to go through all the issues around transplanting whole cells.

Were really looking to move things from discovery to the clinic. CIRM has laid the foundation by establishing a good understanding of mechanistic biology and how stem cells work and is now taking the knowledge and applying it for the benefit of patients, Kent said toward the end of the interview.

Jake Javier and his family

Jakes story: one young mans journey to and through a stem cell transplant; As a former TV writer and producer I tend to be quite critical about the way TV news typically covers medical stories. But a recent story on KTVU, the Fox News affiliate here in the San Francisco Bay Area, showed how these stories can be done in a way that balances hope, and accuracy.

Reporter Julie Haener followed the story of Jake Javier we have blogged about Jake before a young man who broke his spine and was then given a stem cell transplant as part of the Asterias Biotherapeutics clinical trial that CIRM is funding.

Its a touching story that highlights the difficulty treating these injuries, but also the hope that stem cell therapies holds out for people like Jake, and of course for his family too.

If you want to see how a TV story can be done well, this is a great example.

Like Loading...

A recent study estimated there may be more than 500 million people worldwide who have diabetes. Thats an astounding figure and makes diabetes one of the largest chronic disease epidemics in human history.

One of the most serious consequences of untreated or uncontrolled diabetes is kidney damage. That can lead to fatigue, weakness, confusion, kidney failure and even death. So two decisions taken by the CIRM Board today were good news for anyone already suffering from either diabetes or kidney disease. Or both.

The Board awarded almost $10 million to Humacyte to run a Phase 3 clinical trial of an artificial vein needed by people undergoing hemodialysis thats the most common form of dialysis for people with kidney damage. Hemodialysis helps clean out impurities and toxins from the blood. Without it waste will build up in the kidneys with devastating consequences.

The artificial vein is a kind of bioengineered blood vessel. It is implanted in the individuals arm and, during dialysis, is connected to a machine to move the blood out of the body, through a filter, and then back into the body. The current synthetic version of the vein is effective but is prone to clotting and infections, and has to be removed regularly. All this puts the patient at risk.

Humacytes version called a human acellular vessel or HAV uses human cells from donated aortas that are then seeded onto a biodegradable scaffold and grown in the lab to form the artificial vein. When fully developed the structure is then washed to remove all the cellular tissue, leaving just a collagen tube. That is then implanted in the patient, and their own stem cells grow onto it, essentially turning it into their own tissue.

In earlier studies Humacytes HAV was shown to be safer and last longer than current versions. As our President and CEO, Randy Mills, said in a news release, thats clearly good news for patients:

This approach has the potential to dramatically improve our ability to care for people with kidney disease. Being able to reduce infections and clotting, and increase the quality of care the hemodialysis patients get could have a significant impact on not just the quality of their life but also the length of it.

There are currently almost half a million Americans with kidney disease who are on dialysis. Having something that makes life easier, and hopefully safer, for them is a big plus.

The Humacyte trial is looking to enroll around 350 patients at three sites in California; Sacramento, Long Beach and Irvine.

While not all people with diabetes are on dialysis, they all need help maintaining healthy blood sugar levels, particularly people with type 1 diabetes. Thats where the $3.9 million awarded to ViaCyte comes in.

Were already funding a clinical trial with ViaCyte using an implantable delivery system containing stem cell-derived cells that is designed to measure blood flow, detect when blood sugar is low, then secrete insulin to restore it to a healthy level.

This new program uses a similar device, called a PEC-Direct. Unlike the current clinical trial version, the PEC-Direct allows the patients blood vessels to directly connect, or vasularize, with the cells inside it. ViaCyte believes this will allow for a more robust engraftment of the stem cell-derived cells inside it and that those cells will be better able to produce the insulin the body needs.

Because it allows direct vascularization it means that people who get the delivery system will also need to get chronic immune suppression to stop their bodys immune system attacking it. For that reason it will be used to treat patients with type 1 diabetes that are at high risk for acute complications such as severe hypoglycemic (low blood sugar) events associated with hypoglycemia unawareness syndrome.

In a news release Paul Laikind, Ph.D., President and CEO of ViaCyte, said this approach could help patients most at risk.

This high-risk patient population is the same population that would be eligible for cadaver islet transplants, a procedure that can be highly effective but suffers from a severe lack of donor material. We believe PEC-Direct could overcome the limitations of islet transplant by providing an unlimited supply of cells, manufactured under cGMP conditions, and a safer, more optimal route of administration.

The Board also approved more than $13.6 million in awards under our Discovery program. You can see the winners here.

Like Loading...

Now that Asterias Biotherapeutics CIRM-funded, stem cell-based clinical trial for spinal cord injury (SCI) has safely treated its first group of patients and begun recruiting the second, should other SCI researchers close up shop? Of course not. Since its a first-in-human trial, there certainly will be room for improvement even if the therapy proves successful. And it may not work for every SCI victim. So the development of other therapeutic approaches is critical to ensure effective treatments for all patients with this unmet medical need.

Enter the lab of Michael Fehlings at the University of Toronto. Their recent Stem Cells Translational Medicine study describes a potential, minimally invasive therapeutic strategy which involvesa type of brain cell not previously studied in the context of SCI.

In the case of the Asterias trial, embryonic stem cell-derived cells called oligodendrocytes are being transplanted directly into the injured spinal cord to help restore the disrupted nerve signals that cause a whole range of debilitating symptoms, including painful tingling and loss of movement in arms and legs, loss of bladder control and difficulty breathing.

Instead of trying to directly repair the disconnected nerve signals, Fehlings team looked at reducing the damaging effects of inflammation that occur at the site of injury in the days and weeks following the spinal cord trauma. This sounds like a perfect job for mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) whose anti-inflammatory effects are well established. But previous animal studies using MSCs for spinal cord injury have had mixed results. Different sources of MSCs are known to have different anti-inflammatory actions so perhaps this is the culprit behind the variability. On top of that, the exact mechanism of action isnt well understood which presents a barrier to getting FDA approval for clinical trials.

So the current study performed a careful comparative analysis of the healing effects of human cord blood MSCs and human brain vascular pericytes (HBVPs) MSC-like cells found near blood vessels in the brain in a rat model of spinal cord injury. Shortly after the SCI injury, the cells were delivered into the rats through the blood. The blood levels of various cytokines proteins that modulate the inflammation response were measured for several days. The only cytokine that increased in the days after the cell delivery of either cell type was IL-10 which is known for its anti-inflammatory effects.

Examining the spinal cord one to seven days after injury, the researchers found that both MSCs and HBVPs were better than controls at reducing hemorrhaging, with the HBVPs showing better improvement. In terms of long-term effects on functional behaviors, the researchers showed that after three weeks, grip strength, body coordination, and hind limb movement were most improved in the HBVPs.

In a university press release, Fehlings described these promising results:

Michael Fehlings

Our study demonstrates that these cells not only display a MSC phenotype in a dish, but also have similar immunomodulatory effects in animals after spinal cord injury that are more potent than those of non-central nervous system tissue-derived cells. Therefore, these cells are of interest for therapeutic use in acute spinal cord injury.

A lot more work will be needed to translate these findings into clinical trials but for the sake of those suffering from spinal cord injury its encouraging that alternative approaches to treating this devastating, life-changing condition are in development.

Like Loading...

Where will stem cell research be in 10 years?

What would you say to patients who wanted stem cell therapies now?

What are the most promising applications for stem cell research?

Why is it important for the government to fund regenerative medicine?

These challenging and thought-provoking questions were posed to a vibrant group of undergraduate and masters-level students at this years CIRM Bridges to Stem Cell Research and Therapy conference.

Educating the next generation of stem cell scientists

The Bridges program is one of CIRMs educational programs that offers students the opportunity to take coursework at California state schools and community colleges and conduct stem cell research at top universities and industry labs. Its goal is to train the next generation of stem cell scientists by giving them access to the training and skills necessary to succeed in this career path.

The Bridges conference is the highlight of the program and the culmination of the students achievements. Its a chance for students to showcase the research projects theyve been working on for the past year, and also for them to network with other students and scientists.

Bridges students participated in a networking pitch event about stem cell research.

CIRM kicked off the conference with a quick and dirty Stem Cell Pitch networking event. Students were divided into groups, given one of the four questions above and tasked with developing a thirty second pitch that answered their question. They were only given ten minutes to introduce themselves, discuss the question, and pick a spokesperson, yet when each teams speaker took the stage, it seemed like they were practiced veterans. Every team had a unique, thoughtful answer that was inspiring to both the students and to the other scientists in the crowd.

Getting to the clinic and into patients

The bulk of the Bridges conference featured student poster presentations and scientific talks by leading academic and industry scientists. The theme of the talks was getting stem cell research into the clinic and into patients with unmet medical needs.

Here are a few highlights and photos from the talks:

On the clinical track for Huntingtons disease

Leslie Thompson, Professor at UC Irvine, spoke about her latest research in Huntingtons disease (HD). She described her work as a race against time. HD is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder thats associated with multiple social and physical problems and currently has no cure. Leslie described how her lab is heading towards the clinic with human embryonic stem cell-derived neural (brain) stem cells that they are transplanting into mouse models of HD. So far, theyve observed positive effects in HD mice that received human neural stem cell transplants including an improvement in the behavioral and motor defects and a reduction in the accumulation of toxic mutant Huntington protein in their nerve cells.

Leslie Thompson

Leslie noted that because thetransplanted stem cells are GMP-grade (meaning their quality is suitable for use in humans), they have a clear path forward to testing their potential disease modifying activity in human clinical trials. But before her team gets to humans, they must take the proper regulatory steps with the US Food and Drug Administration and conduct further experiments to test the safety and proper dosage of their stem cells in other mouse models as well as test other potential GMP-grade stem cell lines.

Gene therapy for SCID babies

Morton Cowan, a pediatric immunologist from UC San Francisco, followed Leslie with a talk about his efforts to get gene therapy for SCID (severe combined immunodeficiency disease) off the bench into the clinic. SCID is also known as bubble-baby disease and put simply, is caused by a lack of a functioning immune system. SCID babies dont have normal T and B immune cell function and as a result, they generally die of infection or other conditions within their first year of life.

Morton Cowan, UCSF

Morton described how the gold standard treatment for SCID, which is hematopoietic or blood stem cell transplantation, is only safe and effective when the patient has an HLA matched sibling donor. Unfortunately, many patients dont have this option and face life-threatening challenges of transplant rejection (graft-versus host disease). To combat this issue, Morton and his team are using gene therapy to genetically correct the blood stem cells of SCID patients and transplant those cells back into these patients so that they can generate healthy immune cells.

They are currently developing a gene therapy for a particularly hard-to-treat form of SCID that involves deficiency in a protein called Artemis, which is essential for the development of the immune system and for repairing DNA damage in cells. Currently his group is conducting the necessary preclinical work to start a gene therapy clinical trial for children with Artemis-SCID.

Treating spinal cord injury in the clinic

Casey Case, Asterias Biotherapeutics

Casey Case,Senior VP of Research and Nonclinical Development at Asterias Biotherapeutics, gave an update on the CIRM-funded clinical trial for cervical (neck) spinal cord injury (SCI). They are currently testing the safety of transplanting different doses of their oligodendrocyte progenitor cells (AST-OPC1) in a group of SCI patients. The endpoint for this trial is an improvement in movement greater than two motor levels, which would offer a significant improvement in a patients ability to do some things on their own and reduce the cost of their healthcare. You can read more about these results and the ongoing study in our recent blogs (here, here).

Opinion: Scientists should be patient advocates

David Higgins gave the most moving speech of the day. He is a Parkinsons patient and the Patient Advocate on the CIRM board and he spoke about what patient advocates are and how to become one. David explained how, these days, drug development and patient advocacy is more patient oriented and patients are involved at the center of every decision whether it be questions related to how a drug is developed, what side effects should be tolerated, or what risks are worth taking. He also encouraged the Bridges students to become patient advocates and understand what their needs are by asking them.

David Higgins

As a scientist or clinician, you need to be an ambassador. You have a job of translating science, which is a foreign language to most people, and you can all effectively communicate to a lay audience without being condescending. Its important to understand what patients needs are, and youll only know that if you ask them. Patients have amazing insights into what needs to be done to develop new treatments.

Bridging the gap between research and patients

The Bridges conference is still ongoing with more poster presentations, a career panel, and scientific talks on discovery and translational stem cell research and commercializing stem cell therapies to all patients in need. It truly is a once in a lifetime opportunity for the Bridges students, many of whom are considering careers in science and regenerative medicine and are taking advantage of the opportunity to talk and network with prominent scientists.

If youre interested in hearing more about the Bridges conference, follow us on twitter (@CIRMnews, @DrKarenRing, #CIRMBridges2016) and on Instagram (@CIRM_Stemcells).

Like Loading...

Read more:

The Stem Cellar | The Official Blog of CIRM, California's ...

Posted in California Stem Cells | Comments Off on The Stem Cellar | The Official Blog of CIRM, California’s …

Best Master’s Degrees in Biotechnology 2016

Posted: July 26, 2016 at 12:46 am

Biotechnology is a top-notch field of study that emerged into the scientific world as a result of revolutions in Biology, Chemistry, Informatics, and Engineering. It is considered to be an applied branch of Biology. Biotechnology helps out this old and respectable field of science keep up with the pace of time and remain competitive in the contemporary world.

With a Master in Biotechnology, students will study the use of living organisms and bioprocesses in technology, engineering, medicine, agriculture and results in all kinds of bioproducts, from genetically modified food to serious cutting-edge devices used to carry out gene therapy. Students in Master in Biotechnology programs may also explore bioinformatics, which is the application of statistics and computer science to the field of molecular biology. Bioinformatics is extremely important for contemporary biological and molecular researches because the data amount there grows by geometric progression and it is necessary to have adequate technology to process it. Bioinformatic methods are widely used for mapping and analyzing DNA and protein samples, as well as for the study of genetics and molecular modeling. Biotechnology and Bioinformatics do a great favour to traditional fields of study, refreshing them with new methods of research, which allows their drastic development, and you can make your contribution with a Master in Biotechnology degree.

Find out about various Master in Biotechnology programs by following the links below. Don't hesitate to send the "Request free information" form to come in contact with the relevant person at the school and get even more information about the specific Master in Biotechnology program you are interested in.

Continued here:

Best Master's Degrees in Biotechnology 2016

Posted in Biotechnology | Comments Off on Best Master’s Degrees in Biotechnology 2016

The big debate: Stem cell research – CNN.com

Posted: July 25, 2016 at 5:42 am

(CNN) -- Is George W. Bush right to veto the easing of federal funding restrictions on stem cell research?

Stem cells may hold the key to curing diseases like Parkinson's -- but to make them, days-old embryos must be destroyed. In May this year, the U.S. Senate passed a bill easing federal funding restrictions on stem cell research, but President Bush has again vetoed the bill, citing moral grounds.

We ask you: is the cost of stem cell research outweighed by the possibilities that it holds?

What are stem cells?

Stem cells are the building blocks of the human body. They can split and grow into any sort of cell: liver, heart, skin, nerve cells and more.

Stem cells can be harvested from adults and from umbilical cord blood, but at the moment, the most effective stem cells for research are found in days-old embryos.

What do people want to do with them?

Supporters of stem cell research hope that the cells will yield treatments for diseases such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and diabetes, as well as spinal-cord injuries.

What's the debate?

In the USA, President George W. Bush used the first veto of his presidency to kill a 2006 effort to loosen his policy on stem-cell research, which bars the use of federal funding for work that would destroy human embryos.

In April this year, the Senate approved a measure that would roll back President Bush's 2001 limits on embryonic stem-cell research, but the margin was short of the two-thirds needed to override another promised veto.

In a statement issued after the Senate vote, he said he would veto the new bill as well, saying it "crosses a moral line that I and many others find troubling." As promised, he vetoed the bill in June.

What's happening elsewhere?

The British government made a dramatic U-turn in May this year, when it withdrew a proposed ban on research into hybrid embryos -- stem cells made by, for example, injecting human DNA into empty animal cells. Similar research, creating human embryos from animal eggs, is currently underway in China and the United States, the Associated Press reported.

Why do people support stem cell research?

People with chronic and genetic diseases say that stem cell research could be their only hope of finding a cure. Scientists in countries like the USA and Britain say that banning stem cell research would not stop it from taking place elsewhere, and that it should be properly monitored and regulated.

Why do people oppose it?

Many pro-life campaigners equate the procedure to abortion because days-old human embryos are destroyed when the cells are extracted. Some critics also say that stem cell research is an unwanted step towards human cloning.

Are there any other options?

Stem cells harvested from adults and umbilical cord blood are alternatives, as are stem cells created from hybrid cells. At the moment, embryonic stem cells are preferred because they have the greatest ability to divide.

However, scientists led by Shinya Yamanaka at Kyoto University announced in June this year that they had managed to coax a mouse skin cell to reverse its development and return to an embryonic stage where it produced stem cells, Time reported.

What do you think?

Now it's your turn. Is President Bush right to restrict the funding for stem cell research, or should scientists be able to explore the opportunities it offers? Where, if anywhere, should the line be drawn? Share your views, and we'll print the best comments here.

..............................................

From: Dave McIntosh, Calgary, AB, Canada Date: September 4, 2007 Your view: I believe stem cell research should be allowed, people should be granted a chance for recovery. People think to narrow mindly about it, imagine it was yourself in the situation of the individuals who suffer from the diseases and conditions that could be repaired with some research.

From: Cindy Davis, Mississippi, USA Date: June 21, 2007 Your view: Stem Cell research should absolutely be allowed, and Federally funded. I understand that Bush has a 'moral', at least in his mind, obligation to protect unborn embryos, but by denying money to stem cell research he is denying his 'moral' obligations to the many Americans that are in pain and that are suffering because of deblitating diseases that may be cured by Stem Cell Research. True, the diseases may not be cured in Bush's lifetime, or even in the Americans afflicted lifetimes, but steps can be made now to ensure that a cure is eventually found. Bush needs to look at the country, and world, as a whole instead of focusing on the embryos that will most likely never be used again. Why should morals be applied to something that is techniqually not alive?

From: Uriel Epstein, NJ, USA Date: June 21, 2007 Your view: I believe that Bush is absolutely wrong in his decision to veto the stem cell research bill. Stem cell research could have an enormous array of positive results. Paraplegics could walk again, blind people could see again, and it could save the lives of many, many others. At only a few days, the fetus is really just a bunch of cells. It can not think, it can not feel, whereas the thousands of paralyzed people, or people who are near death because of other conditions can. These fetuses would not just be destroyed; they would be used to save the lives of thousands of living, breathing, and feeling humans.

From: julia lucas, Mississauga, Canada Date: June 21, 2007 Your view: I have a 17 year old son who was diagnosed with Type 1 Diabetes at age 13. I was devastated by this, but I could not let him see my pain. He was courageous then, and almost 4 years later, he still is. He was so pleased with his needles, and couldn't wait to tell me how this was going to be his new life. I was struck with profound grief, but inside, I knew I would do everything I could to help my son live as normal a life as possible. Our world is growing increasingly complicated and fearful and therefore, hope must never be taken away from those who need it most. If stem cells will move humanity towards greater compassion, then I believe this is the right direction to take.

From: Jack Carter, Hong Kong Date: June 21, 2007 Your view: I am undecided on this issue but am concerned about comments by some who attack Bush for whatever decision he makes. The media has failed miserably to not report in the same sound byte's that Bush also issued an Executive Order to fund research in turning adult stem cells into ones that have 'embryotic' qualities. Surely that makes alot of sense and removes the 'moral' issues. Are the Bush nay sayer's that unconfident in our scientists to achieve this goal?

From: Manjit Manhas, Surrey, BC, Canada Date: June 21, 2007 Your view: This is the price of human evolution which we must and will pay. We can not go back to the dark past, for that we will need to de-evolve. Since that is not a possibility, we as modern society must move forward very carefully with a balanced approach one that respects life and the other that allows human awareness to expand to meet new challenges. I see so much beauty ahead of us.

From: Alexandra Waugh, New Brunswick, Canada Date: June 21, 2007 Your view: Stem Cell research is the future. The amount of money the U.S. has could make an amazing contribution to curing many diseases. Bush, as usual is taking a step backwards. They are funding a war that KILLS many innocent people everyday. How is it morrally different to use a dish of cells (from fertility facilities that would be discarded regardless) to SAVE people's lives worldwide?

From: Skip Barnes, Dallas, USA Date: June 21, 2007 Your view: I am an American, and I am ashamed that we have a president that refuses to listen to science, but claims to talk to Jesus.

From: Mike Stewart, Farmersville, USA Date: June 21, 2007 Your view: George Bush is SO far out of touch with the people of the US, the world and the scientific world it is absolutely ridiculous! He is NOT the Pope and if idiots like him would understand the importance of research like this, my father might still be alive. But GW wouldn't know about that beause he is rich and his parents are still alive and in good health! Makes me wonder what would happen if it was his mom or dad that were suffering from some disease that the outcome might benefit from this research if he might have a different view. In my opinion, if he says he wouldn't, he is a liar!!! I AM a taxpayer of this great country and I volunteer my tax money to be spent on stem cell research rather than some idiotic guest worker program that bankrupts the economy and negates the reason I have paid taxes for the last 50 years. Wake up Bush or pay the consequences!

From: Steve, Philippines Date: June 21, 2007 Your view: What should we expect from someone who has delivered up total chaos in Iraq, $70/barrel oil, seriously increased the importance of Iran, squandered favorable solid world opinion following 9/11, trashed the deficit and hijacked the constitution? We wouldn't want him to do anything useful, now, would we?

From: Brad Scott, Prescott Valley, USA Date: June 21, 2007 Your view: Sadly, President Bush has once again seen fit to ignore the opinion of the majority of U.S. citizens in favor of his own. He was elected, and now we must suffer his disregard for our views until January of 2009. Hopefully, this issue will be reconsidered again, when our next ELECTED leader responds to the people who put him/her there in the first place. The current President seems not to care about the average American.

From: Magnus Ahlberg, Stockholm, Sweden Date: June 21, 2007 Your view: To restrict funding will not stop progres, maybe just for the moment. But in the future, when another leader steps in, new rules will apply and the research will go forward. There is no way to stop progres and future research, history has tought us that. Also, religion should not prevent research, if done in a humane and safe way.

From: Dan Slone, KS Date: June 21, 2007 Your view: As an american scientist who has worked all over the world it is very sad we have such an arrogant president who does not convey or accept the will of the American people.

The US is falling behind in this critical research that will create therapies to many unmet medical needs.

President Bush has even created a difficult envirnment for Americans abroad due to his arrogance that brings negative feeling to our country and its citizens.

He is the worst president this counrty has ever had. The next president has alot of fence mending ahead, but not until he brings our troops home

From: john lewis, escondido, CA Date: June 21, 2007 Your view: The veto is hypocritical. How does W. rate the"sanctity of human life" of unborn embryos with the lives of 3500 dead American soldiers, and 600,000 dead Iraqis in his accursed "war" ?

From: GEOFFREY ORME, HAWAII, USA Date: June 20, 2007 Your view: No one should be surprised that, once again, President Bush lets his primitive personal beliefs decide policy, rather than the wishes of the majority of the people of the United States of America.

What an unmitigated disaster this President has been! His actions will impact our country and the entire world, for decades to come.

From: Toma~ Vargazon, Ljubljana, Slovenia Date: June 20, 2007 Your view: Allowing embrios to be used for purposes of embriotic stem cell research is a slippery slope. First we allow creation of human embrios in order to cure certain diseases, what if we'll need human fetuses next? What about toddlers?

Experimentation on humans is and should be prohibited whereever it can be replaced by some other means. We should not abandon our most sacred principles whenever we find them to limit us in our goals. A human embrio is geneticaly a unique human.

I find this matter to be attracting a lot more attention than it should. Firstly, mr.Bush did not prohibit embriotic stem cell research, but mearly federal funding of such research. State and private funding is permitted. Secondly, he did increase funding for alternatives to embriotic stem cells.

He did what any responsible leader should.

From: Heather D, Calgary, AB, Canada Date: June 20, 2007 Your view: In this day and age, the fact that the leader of any country would prohibit research that could save so many lives disturbs me. Stem cell research holds so much promise and hope in the medical industry!

While I do acknowledge the President's view on taking a human life to save a human life, and absolutely respect that, the fact is that abortion, unwanted and unplanned pregnancies are not going to go away. I personally believe there is always a better choice then abortion, but I also respect the fact that it is a woman's choice - and if she makes the choice to abort her child, I'd rather see that embryo go to positive use then get thrown in the trash.

I wish the President would listen to the hundreds of medical organizations pleading to allow the chance to improve, if not potentially cure, so many medical problems through this research. It inevitably affects the rest of the world Mr. Bush. Keep your personal opinions out of politics and serve your country! Lead by example.

From: Kelly Baron, Vancouver, Canada Date: June 20, 2007 Your view: If it has been said once, it will be said again, the President of the United States is a hypocrite, who refuses to endorse stricter gun controls in his own country and openly adovates for the development and production of technologically advanced weapons used to enforece "peace",leading to the the death of thousands of innocents at home and abroad, while, at the same time, vetoing the funding of stem cell research, based on his own religious principles and beliefs.

From: mouhammed jammoul, ezza, Lebanon Date: June 20, 2007 Your view: hey everybody...soory for my bad english but am interested to share you with my point of veiw..i think presedent george.w.bush had taken the wrong dicision...why funding of killing people in afghanistan,lebanon,palistine,iraq and other countreis is a good step towards democracy?and why funding of scientific reaserches that could save many human lives along many generations comming is illeagal? its true that many innocent lives may lost the chance to survive and would be killed from days-old-age but the most imortant that the progress in stem cell researshes will be a step in the righ direction towards a more hopefull future for many suffering familleis around the world..thnk u for giving us the chance and i hope i will not be excluded becouse am not american or for political reasons..thanks again..

From: Roger Babb, Ringgold, GA Date: June 20, 2007 Your view: President Bush was placed in office by a dishonest election and has governed for the benefit of a few wealthy business and religous leaders. Scandals and an ill-planned war are been the legacy of the GOP. Family values? Pooh, just so much BS as the GOP rips off our pocketbooks. I just hope that American voters will wake up in 2008 and throw out the GOP crooks.

From: Mark Ferrantin, Los Angeles/CA Date: June 20, 2007 Your view: There is no hope for a country that re-elects and keeps a president like this, swamped in corruption and crimes against humanity. Just to benefit his group financially, George Bush has taken the most damaging decisions to the entire country. Our troops are dying in the middle of a senseless war, our people hit by natural disasters are being left to face devastation of their lives without no federal support and now he murders any hope of finding a cure for terrible diseases. Unfortunately, we can't count on politicians in general, Democrats are awarded the majority in the Senate and House and they just choose to yield to this devilish worst ever president of the US.

From: David Martin, Northamptonshire, United Kingdom Date: June 20, 2007 Your view: Regarding stem cell research, I think the United States is very wrong in it's approach. The US is obviously a great place for opportunity, it's a fantastic place in some respects, but it's ideology seems to be governed presently by religion and to some respect, corruption by that of personal opinion. (People in power). It seems to me that unlike here in Britain, the word of the people seems to count for less to a much greater extent. The political orientation and importance of one man influences all. That is sad.

Stem cell research holds the promise for saving countless lives, and by hindering it's progress, we are harming humanity, not just a minority.

People often forget that advances in technology, (sometimes in unrelated fields of Science), have a snowball effect, and can mutually benefit other Sciences, hence improve our every day lives as human beings.

It often makes me wonder how many of these people that disagree with stem cell research on ethical or religious grounds are actually seriously ill, I could bet with 99% certainty that the majority of them aren't.

They should be ashamed that they play a part in halting the cure of many terrible diseases.

From: Sue Smith, Cedar City/Utah Date: June 20, 2007 Your view: The embryos used in this research are destined to eventually be destroyed, so it makes no sense that scientists are denied the ability to perform what promises to be life-saving research. I'm fed up with the people, including Bush, who have a self-righteous view that scientists want to destroy "little babies." These aren't babies and they never will be babies!

From: Kevan Currie, NB, Canada Date: June 20, 2007 Your view: There is an age old saying that history repeats itself. Over 1000 years ago the church decreed what was right and what was wrong. Some historians believe that due to the "Dark Age" our scientific community was put on hold, and we regressed to a point before the Roman Empire, where they had baths and clean water etc.... I believe in God and I am a Christian, If God did not want our scientist to find a use for these cells then he would not have placed the ability for us to learn how to use them. I guess we should not be upset, no one remembers history, and that is why we will always repeat it. Because of the Veto, Scientist will once again be told what they can peruse and what they can not.

From: Theresa Jarrett, Charleston WV Date: June 20, 2007 Your view: Well to tell you the truth, if GW BUSH had or one of his Girls or Wife or Mother or Father, or someone in his family, just happened to become ill from a disease that he knew was not at all going to be cured from a form of drug here and know, I bet his self would be wishing he had passed the BILL not vetoed it

From: Sundar Varadan, Morgantown/WV Date: June 20, 2007 Your view: If extracting stem cells from days old embryos destroys the fetus, can this be allowed on those fetus that are being voluntarily aborted now ? Then the fate of this research will be tied to the fate of abortion in this country giving temporary reprieve to either side. And even in the event that abortion is banned in this country, they can always go for embryo's from other countries where abortion is not banned. Afterall, this is the administration that believes that human rights when violated on foreign lands can be justified when it serves its purpose ( I am talking about rendition). They also believe that killing a large number of innocent people to catch ahold of one ultimate terrorist is justifiable for the "greater good".

From: Bill Graham, Kitchener ON Date: June 20, 2007 Your view: I am a Canadian, and perhaps, as such, have no business commenting on American matters, but all that happens in the US does directly have an effect on us.

President Bush is letting his personal religious views into the political scene, rather than letting democracy work - that is the wishes of the majority of the citizens of his country. Religion and politics must be kept isolated.

Of course he cannot be re-elected so it does not matter to him. However there is his party. They must think they have some hope in the upcoming election. It's time for them to speak to him, and it is time for the elected representatives of his party to act in accordance with the wishes of the people they represent - democracy in action.

From: Richard Ward, France Date: June 20, 2007 Your view: As an American living in France I cringe on a daily basis reading the news from the U.S. The present administration will veto a bill that has the potential to unlock secrets that could help countless people and refuses to do anything to combat global warming but will commit hundreds of billions of dollars to an unjust and unnecessary war that has done nothing but bring death and destruction to foreign shores and devastate thousands of families of servicemen and women at home.

This President has shown his true colors yet again. It is a disgrace.

From: Misha Havtikess Date: June 20, 2007 Your view: This was just leaked from a speech the President is planning to give: God himself told me that I look good in blue, Texas was the true birthplace of our Savior and stem cell research was wrong because it could stem the cells from becoming the magnimious things that are meant for. And I believe in that with all my heart. So if you have a bad illness that's bad and it's too bad and I support that and will fight to the end to preserve your right to it as well as the right for all. Thank you.

From: Jorn Poulsen, NS, Canada Date: June 20, 2007 Your view: Hi CNN. As usual, I'm impressed at your objective approach to journalism, touching on relevant topics. I hope you will keep it up, and (especially) keep asking interesting questions, even if some of them are "controversial".

I must say I'm worried about the religious injection into the daily lives of quite a few US citizens.

To me personally, there is a (somewhat) abandonment of reason, in favor of certain opinions -- opinions whose implications (some of those same) people simply do not grasp themselves.

Instead of typing in my message here, in this pure-text field, I have put it here: http://www.twinkle.ws/docs/questions.html

(No, I do not live in Western Somoa (as .ws may suggest), I merely own the twinkle.ws domain, and host it out of my basement here in Nova Scotia, Canada.) 🙂

I urge you to bring these topics up, right along with other discussions of religious nature.

For example, when discussing whether Christianity should be taught in public schools, or when asking politicians what their religious beliefs are.

From: Idren Ames, Arvada, Colorado Date: June 19, 2007 Your view: So if destroying embryos after scientific research for a greater good is morally wrong, then should we also as a humanity cease to kill animals for our own consumption?

From: Cary Gollop, Otaki, New Zealand Date: June 18, 2007 Your view: This is the same President Bush who more-or-less single-handedly launched an action in Iraq that has been responsible for the loss of many lives. A few of these (maybe 2000?) are American lives of young men and women, but the vast majority are Arabs. I will quote from a note I sent a few minutes ago to my daughter in Texas. It refers to a CNN report of an action taking place at this very minute:

"A five sided fight, Sunni, Shiite, al Queda, Iraqi, American, all lined up in the first paragraph. but all Arabs and Americans. A bit murky I think. I hope they are all wearing uniforms -- maybe the Americans have developed a new 'scope that makes all hats look either black or white?"

My first point is that 'life' is life, whether American citizens, non-Americans, even animals. My second point is that President Bush would almost certainly be in favour of funding the kind of discriminatory 'scope I mention. My third point is that . . . but that is enough from me. For me 'life' means all life. I do not believe we can avoid taking some life in order to live. The action in Iraq is pure waste. ESCR may not be.

I don't trust President Bush because he is governing from doubtful personal beliefs. I don't trust scientists for the same reason.

From: Chris M, Texas Date: June 18, 2007 Your view: If you were an embryo and you had the choice of either staying in a freezer your entire life, just taking up space and money or being used in stem cell research to help save thousands of lives what would you choose?

From: Greg Zern, West Chester, USA Date: June 18, 2007 Your view: If you believe that life begins at conception (as I do) then the decision regarding embryonic stem cell research is clear. Destroying a fertilized egg is taking a life. As a society, we dare not take an innocent life with the hope that another will be helped. Consider the possible ramifications of such a position! The fact that there is promise in adult stem cell or umbilical cord stem cell research is tangential to the real issue of preserving life.

From: Erika Chacon, Tachira, Venezuela Date: June 16, 2007 Your view: Hi! About the research of sterm cells I have to agree with President Bush... Even when it can be regulated, it's a very agressive procedure! We have to think, how many embryos have to be killed to find cures? Yes, they're going to be killed! Maybe they will not have a right to speech just having a few days of being conceibed, but those embryos are life growing!... Yes, it's true, we can find cure to many diseases and hard conditions in human beings, but isn't ironic that we are killing to ensure long lives? Some people may think that we are killing just cells that are not even people yet, and it is prefered to sacrificate them to give better life conditions to those who are already walking on our world... But the truth is, that those cells we are taking belongs to a human being who has a TOTAL right to grow up, live and smile! And we're not giving the chance to defense him/herself... I know it's hard to live in difficult conditions by some diseases, and some of them! are very cruel with our body... But, that should be cured in other ways... And if it's not possible right now, we have to ensure that those peoples who have it can be treated and that we (by ourselves!!!) can help them through all of this!!!

Thanks for this space to speak about a concern this big!!!

Take care y'all!!!

From: Stacey Nagel Date: June 16, 2007 Your view: As the mother of Jesse Nagel, I'm enclosing a copy of a letter that he wrote and I emailed and faxed to Pres. Bush last week..... Stacey Nagel

My name is Jesse Nagel and I am 15 years old. I found out I had type 1 diabetes on December 6th 2001, 5 1/2 years ago. I had a terrible cold, was nauseous, and had a terrible headache for a few days. My mom thought I these symptoms were all stress related because I saw an airplane crash near my house a few weeks before. My Doctor checked me over and did a urine test and told us that I had diabetes. My parents had to rush me to the hospital.

When I found out I had diabetes, my first thoughts were "What is Diabetes?"

At the hospital, they rushed me into a room in the ER and hooked me up to an IV. Then the Dr. came in and gave me a shot of insulin. Getting shots never really bothered me. I thought okay, you gave me my shot, now I'm better, can I go home.

Talk about a big surprise! I had to stay in the hospital for three days and I didn't even feel sick. While I was there, I learned how to check my blood sugar by pricking my finger and putting it up to a little machine. I had to do this 8-12 times a day. I was scared to give myself shots and made my mom or dad do it for me. I found out that I would have to take these shots for the rest of my life, until a cure is found.

The biggest change in my life was that I couldn't just eat anything, anytime I was hungry. No matter if I was hungry or not, I had to eat 3 meals and 3 snacks at specific times. This was a very big change from my previous life style, especially when the ice cream man would come after I already had my snack. My mom finally figured out how to get around this, but that meant getting another shot. Can you imagine how it feels to a kid to have really think before you eat? First you have to check your blood sugar, and then figure out how many carbs are in the food, then take a shot. Then I could finally eat. Imagine taking 6-8 shots a day, or having to decide if that ice cream is worth having to stick yourself in the arm again.......

About 4 years year ago, I went on an insulin pump. Diabetes is a lot easier to control now, but it's still not easy. Living with type 1 diabetes is still a big challenge. For me the hardest part is all the work and thinking I have to do. With the pump I have to worry about changing the infusion set that is attached to the pump and me. I have to change and fill the cartridge with insulin and change the batteries. I still do lots of blood checks, anywhere from 8 to 12 or more times a day!

Diabetes doesn't stop me from doing anything I want BUT it really gets in the way. I can do anything as long as I take care of myself. I still play baseball, basketball, ride my bike all over and do the stuff that normal 15 year olds do. I just have to stop, check my blood all the time and figure out what to do. After 5.5 years. I'm really getting tired of doing this... but I have no choice . If I want to live, I have to do it. It would be so great to be able to play and hang out with my friends and not have to constantly think about my sugar levels.

I know some really little kids and even babies who have diabetes. What's sad is that they've never known what its like to NOT have diabetes. As long as they can remember, they've always had to take shots and check their blood. A cure would be great for all of us before we get complications like going blind, or having our kidneys and hearts get damaged from having erratic blood sugars for so many years.

I dont know if ESCR is the only way to find a cure for duabetes... But after 5.5 years of living and suffering with the Diabetes Monster, I'm willing to try anything.. I rally want a cure .. Insulin is not a cure, It's life support !!

From: Rebecca Myatt, Boaz, Alabama Date: June 15, 2007 Your view: I am Rebecca Myatt of Boaz, Alabama and I have Parkinson's Disease. I firmly believe if we could expand our research on stem cells, one, glorious day, we would be able to put them to use to save human, useful, happy lives. I don't believe President Bush understands, nor has he any reason to understand, our plight. No one who could benefit from stem cell research is wanting to kill embryos. We don't want to kill anybody; we want to save lives and make lives more productive. If President Bush would simply research the facts; open his heart and try to put himself in our positions, I believe he would see things differently. He is being narrow minded and not reading the facts. This is a program that can be monitored and could mean the difference in living a productive life to a life in bed; living instead of dying. This is such an important decision. My hopes for me and the future are greatly diminished by President Bush's failure to study and realize how important this subject is. I pray neither he nor his family ever need the help of stem cell research.

Sincerely, Rebecca Myatt

From: Renee Sinrod, Clearwater, Florida Date: June 15, 2007 Your view: I learned at age 50 that I had adult onset diabetes. I controlled it for years with diet and never had to take insulin. When I reached 76, I had a sight accident to a toe and developed gangrene which led to amputation above the knee of the left leg. Stem Cell research might be the answer to a cure for diabetes and it is unconscionable for the president to veto any bill that could help to alleviate many diseases now considered incurable.

From: Robert Hull, Rancho Santa Margarita, CA Date: June 15, 2007 Your view: Though I am a firm Republican Christian. I support no aggenda to suppress embryonic research on moral grounds. All life is sacred, yet we must destroy in order to eat so that we may live. Embryonic research is no different; it is the nature of the universe in which we live. We do not sit above that nature. Neither will such research undermine the church even if used for cloning. Cloning is not the creation of new life, but the duplication of what already exists.

Visit link:

The big debate: Stem cell research - CNN.com

Posted in Mississippi Stem Cells | Comments Off on The big debate: Stem cell research – CNN.com

Page 1,721«..1020..1,7201,7211,7221,723..1,7301,740..»