Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jerry Silver and Other Discussion from ChinaSCINet Update

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by crabbyshark View Post
    No.


    The spinal cord regenerates. This regrowth is being inhibited (not ceased, inhibited). Some suggested factors inhibiting regeneration include:
    the scar
    chemicals in your spinal cord
    your immune system

    Scientists are trying to determine how to best deal with whatever is inhibiting regeneration/regrowth/whatever you want to call it so that the spinal cord can regenerate much better.

    It's like if you were driving down the road and the speed limit was 5 MPH. Scientists are trying to figure out to raise the speed limit to 60 MPH.


    This is why there are scientists trying to figure out a treatment that will get it to regenerate better.


    He's talking about actual axon growth man.


    If you want drive from NY to LA, even at 5 mph you'll eventually get there. No matter how long after SCI, your axons will never reach its target destination. The axons in the spinal cord stop... 0 mph.

    You first try to tell me the spinal cord regenerates by providing a link on peripheral nerves that do regenerate to their targets, but unfortunately are not in the spinal cord. Next you tell me my spinal cord is regenerating, just slowly. That is just flat out wrong. Now you are saying that the spinal cord regenerates because it would but is being blocked at the lesion. Potential does not equal actual. The fact that it is blocked in mammals by a lesion means that the spinal cord doesn't regenerate. I'm not arguing why the spinal cord doesn't regenerate, I'm stating that it doesn't.

    You can keep trying to save face by changing your belief from the spinal cord regenerating slowly to it being inhibited, and by arguing semantics on "cease" vs "inhibit", but the spinal cord does not regenerate on its own. Some axons may try to, but they never do. End of story.

    Comment


      Originally posted by NowhereMan View Post
      The axons in the spinal cord stop... 0 mph.
      This is not true.

      Originally posted by NowhereMan View Post
      You first try to tell me the spinal cord regenerates by providing a link on peripheral nerves that do regenerate to their targets, but unfortunately are not in the spinal cord.
      Now I've provided you a better link with three-dimensional images of axons in the spinal cord regenerating.

      Originally posted by NowhereMan View Post
      Next you tell me my spinal cord is regenerating, just slowly. That is just flat out wrong.
      I've been saying this the whole time.

      Originally posted by NowhereMan View Post
      Now you are saying that the spinal cord regenerates because it would but is being blocked at the lesion.
      I don't know for sure what all is inhibiting regeneration. It could be a combination of things.

      Originally posted by NowhereMan View Post
      Potential does not equal actual. The fact that it is blocked in mammals by a lesion means that the spinal cord doesn't regenerate.
      If regeneration is blocked by the lesion, it means regeneration is occurring and is blocked by the lesion.

      Originally posted by NowhereMan View Post
      I'm not arguing why the spinal cord doesn't regenerate, I'm stating that it doesn't.
      Misinformation like this is why I finally started posting.

      Originally posted by NowhereMan View Post
      You can keep trying to save face by changing your belief from the spinal cord regenerating slowly to it being inhibited, and by arguing semantics on "cease" vs "inhibit", but the spinal cord does not regenerate on its own. Some axons may try to, but they never do. End of story.
      Axonal regeneration in the spinal cord is occurring. Regeneration is very slow and is inhibited.

      It is notable that 3D imaging also revealed regrowth of unconditioned axons after chronic injury, highlighting a previously underestimated regenerative potential. Because clearing and subsequent3D imaging allow the tracing of axons up to their tip, it enables unequivocal identification of regenerative axons versus spared axons.

      Comment


        I'm kind of caught in the middle here because there are some of us 20yrs+ who have experienced a sort of 'spontaneous regeneration' as Dr Young calls it ... I know I experienced it myself before the Ampyra came along (and greatly improved things). Dr Young claimed he had a friend that this happened to as well after decades.

        My left abdomen below the navel came back in a patch after I work up from some unrelated surgery. Eight years later that area expanded by an inch or so, down and across.

        I'm the anomaly with Transverse Myelitis though as I don't know enough about how these research options will or will not help me.
        Roses are red. Tacos are enjoyable. Don't blame immigrants, because you're unemployable.

        T-11 Flaccid Paraplegic due to TM July 1985 @ age 12

        Comment


          Originally posted by crabbyshark View Post
          This is not true.




          Axonal regeneration in the spinal cord is occurring. Regeneration is very slow and is inhibited.

          If regeneration is occurring and is very slow then wouldn't eventually everyone with a spinal cord injury regain their lost functions naturally? Wouldn't axons eventually be crossing the injury site? Congratulations for drawing me into one of the dumbest arguments ever.

          Comment


            Originally posted by NowhereMan View Post
            If regeneration is occurring and is very slow then wouldn't eventually everyone with a spinal cord injury regain their lost functions naturally? Wouldn't axons eventually be crossing the injury site? Congratulations for drawing me into one of the dumbest arguments ever.
            only if everyone lives to be 842 years old!

            Comment


              Originally posted by skeaman View Post
              Grammy
              She also says it will 10 to 15 years ? But when you listen to all the other videos the researchers seems to think we will see .Big things this year or is it only me thinking that
              If I'm hearing the question correctly, the participant was asking if StemCells Inc would be adding a scaffolding approach such as InVivo's product (that hasn't had any clearance from the FDA to begin testing yet).

              From the way I heard the response was that each component of a combinational therapy would need to be tested individually in an animal model. They're watching the biomaterial field moving forward in it's research in the coming years. It appears as the discoveries and progress moves forward to prove efficacy in these additional factors, eventually they would be added and tested in a total combination. They're open to the theory that greater benefits may be attained with combinations, however with each added factor put into a combination therapy it adds more research time.
              http://spinalcordresearchandadvocacy.wordpress.com/

              Comment


                Originally posted by NowhereMan View Post
                If regeneration is occurring and is very slow then wouldn't eventually everyone with a spinal cord injury regain their lost functions naturally? Wouldn't axons eventually be crossing the injury site? Congratulations for drawing me into one of the dumbest arguments ever.
                Very good question. Perhaps if we lived to be 1,000 years old we would all regain some function. We don't. In most of us, the inhibitors are preventing more than enough axons from regenerating across the injury site to keep us from seeing functional improvement.

                I'll try to explain it like this:

                Imagine you and 10,000 other drivers are at an intersection. You all drive slow cars.

                Now, let's assume you don't know how to speak German. A police officer that speaks only German crosses the road and stops in front of your cars. He will not move and he will not let you go past him. You're not totally sure why. You are all inching forward but he's stubborn and no one can get by. More cars are piling up behind you.

                After waiting a little while, some drivers get frustrated and try to detour around him (growth cones)
                . A few other drivers, feeling bold, defy the officer and manage to sneak by him. For whatever reason you and many of the other drivers are not comfortable doing that yet. You decide you have some choices: you could run the officer over (scaffold), you could throw a bomb at him (chemicals), or you could find a translation app on your iPhone that speaks his language and try asking him to let you by (stem cells).

                You decide to try the app. To your surprise, after speaking to him in German, he gladly agrees to let you through. You are all still driving slow cars, but you are all now finally cruising down the road.

                This is kind of a crude example but I hope it helps explain what's going on.
                Last edited by crabbyshark; 23 Jan 2013, 2:30 AM.

                Comment


                  Frickin Germans.

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by crabbyshark View Post

                    Very good question. Perhaps if we lived to be 1,000 years old we would all regain some function. We don't. In most of us, the inhibitors are preventing more than enough axons from regenerating across the injury site to keep us from seeing functional improvement.

                    I'll try to explain it like this:

                    Imagine you and 10,000 other drivers are at an intersection. You all drive slow cars.

                    Now, let's assume you don't know how to speak German. A police officer that speaks only German crosses the road and stops in front of your cars. He will not move and he will not let you go past him. You're not totally sure why. You are all inching forward but he's stubborn and no one can get by. More cars are piling up behind you.

                    After waiting a little while, some drivers get frustrated and try to detour around him (growth cones). A few other drivers, feeling bold, defy the officer and manage to sneak by him. For whatever reason you and many of the other drivers are not comfortable doing that yet. You decide you have some choices: you could run the officer over (scaffold), you could throw a bomb at him (dissolve scar), or you could find a translation app on your iPhone that speaks his language and try asking him to let you by (stem cells).

                    You decide to try the app. To your surprise, after speaking to him in German, he gladly agrees to let you through. You are all still driving slow cars, but you are all now finally cruising down the road.

                    This is kind of a crude example but I hope it helps explain what's going on.
                    So wait, are you saying there's going to be an app to fix us? Best news I've had all day!

                    Thanks for the entertainment and perseverance. I understand what you're saying and agree.

                    Clayton
                    "Wheelie Wanna Walk!"

                    Comment


                      Paolo,

                      1. Where is your evidence that such "fibrotic scars" exist inside injured human spinal cords? Do you have any evidence that removal of such scars helps any animal or human with spinal cord injury? You don't because there isn't any evidence. In fact, removal of glial scars have been shown to be damaging to the spinal cord.

                      2. No, I would not remove "fibrotic scar" from inside the spinal cord because there is no credible evidence that physical removal of glial scar improves recovery and ample evidence suggesting axons will grow through such scars with several non-invasive therapies, e.g.
                      • If axons are activated to grow with cAMP, PTEN deletion, mTOR activation.
                      • Lithium and chondroitinase stimulate regeneration through such scars.

                      3. What clinical trials of "glial scar" therapies are you talking about? I know of no clinical trial being planned that will test any "glial scar" therapy. Are you referring to chondroitinase or the CSPG receptor blockers? If either of these therapies stimulate regeneration, it would confirm that gliosis does not pose a tight mechanical barrier to axon growth.

                      When confronted with evidence that you are wrong, you obfuscate with false claims and ad hominem attacks.

                      Wise.

                      Originally posted by paolocipolla View Post
                      Wise,

                      what would you do should you find fibrotic scar in the lesion site, would you remove it or not?

                      About the glial scar I am happy that there are clinical trials coming that are based on the glial scar theory so that we'll see if it works better than UCBC + Li.
                      At least there are many studies that support such trials, while you have not a single study that is the same as what you are doing. I think you have runned the risk to harm people much more than others are palnning to do.

                      Sure I hope there will be a way to cure SCI that does not require an invasive surgery, but I think for that to happen it is necessary to study more the glial scar and the fibrotic scar, so that perhaps someone will find a way to make our body get rid of whatever stops axons from regenerating.

                      Paolo
                      Last edited by Wise Young; 23 Jan 2013, 8:15 AM.

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by Wise Young View Post
                        Paolo,

                        1. Where is your evidence that such "fibrotic scars" exist inside injured human spinal cords? Do you have any evidence that removal of such scars helps any animal or human with spinal cord injury? You don't because there isn't any evidence. In fact, removal of glial scars have been shown to be damaging to the spinal cord. SEE MY SECOND W2W PRESENTATION.

                        2. No, I would not remove "fibrotic scar" from inside the spinal cord because there is no credible evidence that physical removal of glial scar improves recovery and ample evidence suggesting axons will grow through such scars with several non-invasive therapies, e.g.
                        • If axons are activated to grow with cAMP, (NO EVIDENCE FOR GROWTH THROUGH JUST FARTHER INTO THE LESION) PTEN deletion, mTOR activation (ONLY IN MICE WITH VERY CAREFULLY CRAFTED NARROW LESIONS. MAKE THE LESION SLIGHTLY BIGGER IN MOUSE OR USE RATS AND NOTHING GETS THROUGH ).
                        • Lithium and chondroitinase stimulate regeneration through such scars. (NO GOOD EVIDENCE THAT EITHER OR IN COMBINATION ALLOWS FOR REGENERATION COMPLETELY THROUGH A SCAR)

                        3. What clinical trials of "glial scar" therapies are you talking about? I know of no clinical trial being planned that will test any "glial scar" therapy. Are you referring to chondroitinase or the CSPG receptor blockers? If either of these therapies stimulate regeneration, it would confirm that gliosis does not pose a tight mechanical barrier to axon growth. TIGHT IS ONLY RELATIVE, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN ABSOLUTE BARRIER. YOUR EVIDENCE IS NO PROOF THAT SCAR DOES NOT EXIST. IT IS ONLY EVIDENCE THAT SCAR BARRIER PROPERTIES ARE NOT ABSOLUTE. BUT THEY ARE VERY POTENT. AXON GROWTH INTO A SCAR CAVITY IS FUNCTIONLESS AND WELL KNOWN TO BE DEPENDENT UPON SCHWANN CELL SUBSTRATES THAT HAVE THE CAPACITY TO ENTER THE CORE OF THE SCAR OVER TIME. HERE'S YET ANOTHER VERY NICE ARTICLE SHOWING THE ROLE OF GLIOSIS IN CREATING SCAR. Title: Astrocyte activation and wound healing in intact-skull mouse after focal brain injury
                        Author(s): Suzuki, Takayuki; Sakata, Honami; Kato, Chiaki; et al.
                        Source: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE Volume: 36 Issue: 12 Pages: 3653-3664 DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2012.08280.x Published: DEC 2012

                        When confronted with evidence that you are wrong, you obfuscate with false claims and ad hominem attacks. YOU DO PRECISELY THE SAME AND I THINK THE ATTACK ON PAOLO IS UNWARRANTED. i agree with Paolo that there is zero evidence that LI and/or UMBC can allow for regeneration completely through a scar.

                        Wise.

                        See my insertions in CAPS within the body of the quote
                        Last edited by jsilver; 23 Jan 2013, 1:06 PM.

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by jsilver View Post
                          See my insertions in CAPS within the body of the quote
                          Funny to see Dr Silver defending Paolo that way… I wonder why Paolo does not bug Silver with all the non-stop questioning and evidences instead??
                          "Talk without the support of action means nothing..."
                          ― DaShanne Stokes

                          ***Unite(D) to Fight Paralyses***

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by Moe View Post
                            Funny to see Dr Silver defending Paolo that way… I wonder why Paolo does not bug Silver with all the non-stop questioning and evidences instead??
                            Because J.Silver is not bluff. Very simple.

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by kivi66 View Post
                              Because J.Silver is not bluff. Very simple.
                              Kiwi,
                              How can you be so sure? Still not a vaid reason in why not asking him the questions instead since you think he's no bluff. Very simple indeed. There's a difference between lab rat experiments to the human ones, comparing and insisting rat results as it was to humans isn't it a bluff allready?
                              "Talk without the support of action means nothing..."
                              ― DaShanne Stokes

                              ***Unite(D) to Fight Paralyses***

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by crabbyshark View Post


                                Very good question. Perhaps if we lived to be 1,000 years old we would all regain some function. We don't. In most of us, the inhibitors are preventing more than enough axons from regenerating across the injury site to keep us from seeing functional improvement.

                                I'll try to explain it like this:

                                Imagine you and 10,000 other drivers are at an intersection. You all drive slow cars.

                                Now, let's assume you don't know how to speak German. A police officer that speaks only German crosses the road and stops in front of your cars. He will not move and he will not let you go past him. You're not totally sure why. You are all inching forward but he's stubborn and no one can get by. More cars are piling up behind you.

                                After waiting a little while, some drivers get frustrated and try to detour around him (growth cones)
                                . A few other drivers, feeling bold, defy the officer and manage to sneak by him. For whatever reason you and many of the other drivers are not comfortable doing that yet. You decide you have some choices: you could run the officer over (scaffold), you could throw a bomb at him (chemicals), or you could find a translation app on your iPhone that speaks his language and try asking him to let you by (stem cells).

                                You decide to try the app. To your surprise, after speaking to him in German, he gladly agrees to let you through. You are all still driving slow cars, but you are all now finally cruising down the road.

                                This is kind of a crude example but I hope it helps explain what's going on.

                                Hahaha

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X