http://www.scimitarequity.com/blog/2011/04/01/rising-concerns-about-i...

Rising concerns about Induced Pluripotent (iPS) cells
April 1st, 2011 Henry McCusker Leave a comment Go to comments

 Induced pluripotent stem cells looked like a perfect solution to
ethical debate … when they were first discovered in 2006.

Instead of destroying an embryo, iPS cells are made in a lab from
ordinary skin or blood cells. Using various methods, scientists
introduce 3 or 4 genes that return these cells to an embryonic-like
state in which they, too, are able to turn into any type of cell.

    * iPS cells can be made with tissue from people with known genetic
diseases; scientists can then use them to study how diseases develop
or to test the effectiveness of drugs. Already, researchers have made
iPS cells from patients with Gaucher’s disease, Down Syndrome,
Parkinson’s and diabetes.

But recently, scientists have started to raise concerns about iPS
cells.

    * Last year, a group led by Dr. Robert Lanza, chief scientific
officer of ACTC.OB, compared batches of iPS cells to embryonic stem
cells and noticed the iPS cells died more quickly and was much less
capable of growing and expanding;
    * In 7/10, Dr George Daley of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute and
Medical  School’s team reported more problems in the journal Nature,
showing that iPS cells retain a bit of memory of their prior life as
adult tissue, which could limit their use;
    *  An international team led by researchers at the UC, San Diego
also found genetic mutations in 22 iPS cell lines taken from 7
different labs;

ACTC.OB won FDA approval last year for a clinical trial to treat a
progressive form of blindness called Stargardt’s macular dystrophy,
and in 1/11 won FDA approval to start using embryonic stem cells to
treat macular degeneration. GERN’s 2010 success  won the FDA’s nod for
the first ever approved study of human embryonic stem cells to treat
people whose spinal cords had been crushed. (HWM and Reuters)

The Bottom Line: Stem cell scientists are not giving up on iPS cells,
but instead of a replacement for embryonic stem cells, they see them
filling a unique research role. Imperfections mar hopes for
reprogrammed stem cells. But while they have proven to be a powerful
new way to study human disease, the reprogrammed cells known as
induced pluripotent stem cells, or iPS cells are no substitute for
embryonic stem cells. “It has not ever been a scientifically driven
argument that iPS cells are a worthy and complete substitute for
embryonic stem cells,” Daley said and those arguments were always made
based on political and religious opposition to embryonic stem cells”.
“There are serious problems with this iPS cell technology that still
need to be solved,” Robert Lanza, CSO of ACTC.OB and abnormalities in
iPS cells could raise flags among regulators that these cells could
cause problems in people.  But the political path for embryonic stem
cells is still murky. The Obama administration overturned the
strictest of the limitations imposed  former President Bush on using
federal funds for the research, but last summer that policy was
challenged in court. A US appeals court has ruled that funding could
continue while the government appeals, but grants from the NIH have
been frozen, unfrozen with the court battles continuing.The gold
standard cells at the present time are embryonic stem cells. But the
issue has been a point of controversy for some religious
conservatives, who believe the destruction of any human embryo is
wrong. Will researchers be able ultimately to use iPS cells for
treatments … probably in time and based on more research!

"embryonic-like  cells"
~Using various methods, scientists
introduce 3 or 4 genes that return these cells to an embryonic-like
state in which they, too, are able to turn into any type of cell. ~~
Those against the current science  are comparing apples and
fruitcocktail.. It might be a rehasing of the american made
pharmaceutical issue many of which are made in PR.
This is really about big big financial interests and big money and
powerful interests are trying to buy control backhandedly through
propaganda. It has been proven to be the way to control the thinking
of the people. Your vote is all you have ...well you can sign forms to
recall politicians too.

...is this what happens?  it seems that first they ask us to vote for
themselves then they tell us what they want to vote for? unless they
put regenerative medicine foremost on their list how could we want the
representation they offend?

On Apr 1, 11:22 am, Rumit <timur.cla...@gmail.com> wrote: