Dogs, Stem Cells, Politics, Priorities

It was the luck of the Irish. Rhiannon, an elkhound whose name derives from the Stevie Nicks song about a Celtic goddess, escaped death at the hand of her abuser and found a kinder, gentler world with Edward Milne of Cheshire. Now, Mr. Milne is giving the elderly dog a chance for a longer life through cutting-edge veterinary treatment.

Rhiannon is one of two canine patients making veterinary history in Connecticut through the states first in-clinic stem cell regenerative therapy. She has severe arthritis in her elbow and back. Dakota, a Bernese Mountain Dog and Great White Pyrenees mix who has torn crucial ligaments in both knees, is also receiving the treatment for her injuries.

The dogs are receiving a non-controversial adipose regenerative stem cell therapy through which about two tablespoons of fat are extracted from each of the dogs and processed to capture adult stem cells that can be injected back into the animal. There they will regenerate, improving the function of the damaged parts.

These lucky dogs will receive whatever benefits can be derived from this developing technology while humans still face the ethical and political battles that human embryo stem cell therapy engender. Because embryonic cells, which can differentiate into more than 220 cell types found in the adult human body, must be harvested from human embryos, thereby destroying the cell clusters, many equate the process with abortion.

Embryonic stem cells are, however, more versatile than the less objectionable adult stem cells, which can produce only a limited number of cell types. Embryonic stem cell research currently promises more dramatic therapeutic outcomes for a wider range of debilitiesfrom repair of diseased organs to restored mobility for the paralyzed.

Research, while promising, is stillwellembryonic. Tests conducted in Europe last year showed that two out of three patients with severe spinal injuries regained some sensation in the regions below where the injuries occurred. Equally important was the fact that there appeared to be no negative reactions. Still, there is a long way to go before humans can hope for full therapeutic results from stem cell therapy.

The argument over when life begins is a potent one. It is virtually unanswerable. But just as important is the issue of quality of life for those already born. Is it worse to harvest stem cells from a five-day old mass of cells that could someday become a human being or to leave a fully developed person to suffer, perhaps to waste away into death? Which life is more important? The question becomes even more germane when weighed against the fact that embryonic stem cells are harvested from excess embryos created during the in vitro fertilization processembryos that are destined to be destroyed (with parental permission) without ever developing further.

We believe it is better to cure the sick and the lame than to nurture every cluster of cells.

Rhiannon is one of two canine patients making veterinary history in Connecticut through the states first in-clinic stem cell regenerative therapy. She has severe arthritis in her elbow and back. Dakota, a Bernese Mountain Dog and Great White Pyrenees mix who has torn crucial ligaments in both knees, is also receiving the treatment for her injuries.

The dogs are receiving a non-controversial adipose regenerative stem cell therapy through which about two tablespoons of fat are extracted from each of the dogs and processed to capture adult stem cells that can be injected back into the animal. There they will regenerate, improving the function of the damaged parts.

Read more from the original source:
Dogs, Stem Cells, Politics, Priorities