Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Turning glial cells into neurons

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

    Turning glial cells into neurons

    Has anyone else heard of this? The page below, while being a fundraising page, provides more information. It is not directed solely towards SCI but certainly could be a piece of the puzzle.
    https://pennstate.useed.net/projects/126/home

    #2
    I read on that just awhile back and they mentioned trying it on SCI. I thought the open paper yesterday in Nature Communications on motor neurons was very exciting also.

    http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2015/15...comms7778.html
    http://spinalcordresearchandadvocacy.wordpress.com/

    Comment


      #3
      It would be great if they could fire up some lower moter neurons. I would be happy with that to maybe bring back B & B function.

      Comment


        #4
        At our Summer Open House, July 16: Dr. Paul Lu, Bridging the Injured Spinal Cord with Neural Stem Cells.

        Comment


          #5
          Jim, that's awesome! I can't wait for it now!

          Comment


            #6
            Question 1: Why do you think it was that Dr. Oswald Steward could not replicate the results you had in your 2012 paper?

            Comment


              #7
              Thanks Jim, I might drop by to this one, I might spend my vacation in Jersey this year...
              "Talk without the support of action means nothing..."
              ― DaShanne Stokes

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

              Comment


                #8
                Very encouraging news

                Comment


                  #9
                  Nowhere Man, what paper are you referring to regarding Oz Steward not being able to replicate? Wise

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Wise Young View Post
                    Nowhere Man, what paper are you referring to regarding Oz Steward not being able to replicate? Wise
                    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24747827

                    Abstract:
                    As part of the NIH "Facilities of Research Excellence-Spinal Cord Injury" project to support independent replication, we repeated key parts of a study reporting robust engraftment of neural stem cells (NSCs) treated with growth factors after complete spinal cord transection in rats. Rats (n=20) received complete transections at thoracic level 3 (T3) and 2weeks later received NSC transplants in a fibrin matrix with a growth factor cocktail using 2 different transplantation methods (with and without removal of scar tissue). Control rats (n=9) received transections only. Hindlimb locomotor function was assessed with the BBB scale. Nine weeks post injury, reticulospinal tract axons were traced in 6 rats by injecting BDA into the reticular formation. Transplants grew to fill the lesion cavity in most rats although grafts made with scar tissue removal had large central cavities. Grafts blended extensively with host tissue obliterating the astroglial boundary at the cut ends, but in most cases there was a well-defined partition within the graft that separated rostral and caudal parts of the graft. In some cases, the partition contained non-neuronal scar tissue. There was extensive outgrowth of GFP labeled axons from the graft, but there was minimal ingrowth of host axons into the graft revealed by tract tracing and immunocytochemistry for 5HT. There were no statistically significant differences between transplant and control groups in the degree of locomotor recovery. Our results confirm the previous report that NSC transplants can fill lesion cavities and robustly extend axons, but reveal that most grafts do not create a continuous bridge of neural tissue between rostral and caudal segments.


                    Question 2: What is your plan to prevent tumors from forming after transplantation? Why were they missed in the original study?

                    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4198542/

                    Abstract:
                    We reported previously the formation of ectopic colonies in widespread areas of the nervous system after transplantation of fetal neural stem cells (NSCs) into spinal cord transection sites. Here, we characterize the incidence, distribution, and cellular composition of the colonies. NSCs harvested from E14 spinal cords from rats that express GFP were treated with a growth factor cocktail and grafted into the site of a complete spinal cord transection. Two months after transplant, spinal cord and brain tissue were analyzed histologically. Ectopic colonies were found at long distances from the transplant in the central canal of the spinal cord, the surface of the brainstem and spinal cord, and in the fourth ventricle. Colonies were present in 50% of the rats, and most rats had multiple colonies. Axons extended from the colonies into the host CNS. Colonies were strongly positive for nestin, a marker for neural precursors, and contained NeuN-positive cells with processes resembling dendrites, GFAP-positive astrocytes, APC/CC1-positive oligodendrocytes, and Ki-67-positive cells, indicating ongoing proliferation. Stereological analyses revealed an estimated 21,818 cells in a colony in the fourth ventricle, of which 1005 (5%) were Ki-67 positive. Immunostaining for synaptic markers (synaptophysin and VGluT-1) revealed large numbers of synaptophysin-positive puncta within the colonies but fewer VGluT-1 puncta. Continuing expansion of NSC-derived cell masses in confined spaces in the spinal cord and brain could produce symptoms attributable to compression of nearby tissue. It remains to be determined whether other cell types with self-renewing potential can also form colonies.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Of course the question that will be asked 5 times will be: When are the human trials and how do I get in?

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by Nowhere Man View Post
                        Of course the question that will be asked 5 times will be: When are the human trials and how do I get in?
                        Tell me nowhere man, would you not partake in the epidural stimulator trial if you could? Giving you back bladder, bowel control as well as some sexual function? Yes, your not doing backflips and handstands but these "minor" imProvement's greatly affect quality of life. You think you're telling anyone something we don't know by saying a rat has never been cured? But we have no treatments for paralysis, any functional improvements are great that's why we are excited about human trials. Believe I wanna be 100% again but I'll happily take 30% for now. Case you haven't noticed basically in all of medical science we have never really "cured" much, if anything. Chemotherapy might help, we want to eradicate the disease tho, I dialysis will keep you alive but we want a repaired kidney, amputees use prostatic's but they want a regenerated fully functioning limb..

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by JamesMcM View Post
                          Tell me nowhere man, would you not partake in the epidural stimulator trial if you could? Giving you back bladder, bowel control as well as some sexual function? Yes, your not doing backflips and handstands but these "minor" imProvement's greatly affect quality of life. You think you're telling anyone something we don't know by saying a rat has never been cured? But we have no treatments for paralysis, any functional improvements are great that's why we are excited about human trials. Believe I wanna be 100% again but I'll happily take 30% for now. Case you haven't noticed basically in all of medical science we have never really "cured" much, if anything. Chemotherapy might help, we want to eradicate the disease tho, I dialysis will keep you alive but we want a repaired kidney, amputees use prostatic's but they want a regenerated fully functioning limb..
                          No I would not partake if I could. Not until it is proven that it could restore b/b/ or s in complete injury. They've tested 2 completes and have just gone by their word. That is absolutely meaningless. SCI make shit up all the time. Even their description is meaningless. "Improved" or "Restored"? What does that mean. Not being ale to feel or control bladder, but bladder capacity increasing by 100 ml is "improved". Too vague. Give me graphic detail. They'd have to pay me a lot to be in that trial. It seems safe though. There's no regeneration or anything like that.

                          Many people here have said that rats have been cured, how they wish they were a rat, how the science is already here but needs to be tried in trial..etc. All garbage. No rat with complete injury has seen any meaningful recovery of function. Show me a reputable study where completely injured rats have restored function to any meaningful degree, and I'd be all for taking it to trial.

                          This is irrelevant to the thread. I don't have any ill-will towards Dr. Paul Lu but he has some questions to answer. No harm in that. He may have valid answers. That's science; answering questions about your discoveries.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            i tend not to agree with Nowhereman, but seeing his point. What do we have? In meaning of recovery ...what do we have?
                            "That's not smog! It's SMUG!! " - randy marsh, southpark

                            "what???? , you don't 'all' wear a poop sac?.... DAMNIT BONNIE, YOU LIED TO ME ABOUT THE POOP SAC!!!! "


                            2010 SCINet Clinical Trial Support Squad Member
                            Please join me and donate a dollar a day at http://justadollarplease.org and copy and paste this message to the bottom of your signature

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Nowhere Man View Post
                              No I would not partake if I could. Not until it is proven that it could restore b/b/ or s in complete injury. They've tested 2 completes and have just gone by their word. That is absolutely meaningless. SCI make shit up all the time. Even their description is meaningless. "Improved" or "Restored"? What does that mean. Not being ale to feel or control bladder, but bladder capacity increasing by 100 ml is "improved". Too vague. Give me graphic detail. They'd have to pay me a lot to be in that trial. It seems safe though. There's no regeneration or anything like that.

                              Many people here have said that rats have been cured, how they wish they were a rat, how the science is already here but needs to be tried in trial..etc. All garbage. No rat with complete injury has seen any meaningful recovery of function. Show me a reputable study where completely injured rats have restored function to any meaningful degree, and I'd be all for taking it to trial.

                              This is irrelevant to the thread. I don't have any ill-will towards Dr. Paul Lu but he has some questions to answer. No harm in that. He may have valid answers. That's science; answering questions about your discoveries.
                              I agree, but have you seen ever animal trial results for example the trial in Russia etc. There Is a lot going on that we haven't seen.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X