Is stem cell treatment really far 10 years more???????!!

[Shwetarose]

Dear Respected Sr.Wise young,
Please view the below link. is stem cell treatment really far 10 years??? please give me honest views. We cant really wait SCI patients where blind can see, heart patients get relief,diabetic r cured then wot abt us? 10 years more?????

I m really sad to read this article.god cant do favor to us early.


http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_f...ntent_id=98663

Shweta.

[Curt Leatherbee]

We can thank

The G.W Bush administration for this, they have set us back years.

Had Clinton and Blair had their way back in 2000 we would be years ahead right now.

[bigbob]

Curt, inspite of the Bush Administration, the US is far behind. We can not blame him if we don't make it our business to get attention. Wasn't Reagan against curing Aids? Aid's activism changed that, and it wasn't by handing out a nice little pamphet to a congressman. The TV was full of pictures of people suffering from aids, stories of what a caregiver had to do to help the person with aids everyday. Again, I hope my comment does not detract from anyone's efforts that attended the last rally, but, where is the despair? Where is the news coverage?

[Wise Young]

Shwetarose,

Thank you for posting the article. The increasing governmental regulation of stem cell research is becoming worrisome. I was listening to several talk shows this weekend on television and heard many of the opponents to embryonic stem cell research advocating for a new governmental regulatory agency that will be dominated by political appointees and whose purpose will be to regulate cellular therapeutics in the United States. I sincerely hope that the cell therapy industry does not become like gene therapy which was beset by so many regulations and paperwork that it was difficult to get treatments into clinical trial. To date, no gene therapy has yet to be approved by the FDA. I want to point out that the additional regulations will slow not only human embryonic stem cells but also adult and umbilical cord blood research.

On the other hand, I want to point out that there are three good developments:
1. California, New Jersey, and several other states are beginning to fill the stem cell funding gap. Stem cell research is beginning to take off for the first time in the United States. Many people do not realize was that embryonic stem cell research was not the only research that had been suppressed. Human adult stem cell research was also getting very little funding. In 2004, less than $200 million was spent on all of human adult/umbilical cord blood stem cell research. This is a pittance compared to what is required to get a therapy from the laboratory bench to market. California alone will be spending $300 million on human stem cell research in 2005. Combined, the other states will probably spend $200 million this year. Thus, this represents a tripling of stem cell research funding in the United States. This will give a tremendous boost to the research. Just the talk about such funding alone has led to a lot of additional research.

2. Many institutions are investing significantly into stem cell institutes in the United States. I suspect that the total amount of private and institutional investment in stem cell research has increased by $500 million in 2005 alone. This is providing the infrastructure for stem cell research and will go a long ways to helping the United States regain its leadership position in the field. Please note that the United States still leads in terms of animal stem cell research, even though Korea leads in the cloning and human embryonic stem cell research. Europe is still ahead of the United States in adult stem cell research.

3. Stem cell biology is alive and well in the United States. Although funding has been restricted for human stem cell research in the United States, U.S. scientists have been leading the world when it comes to stem cell biology, i.e. studying the characteristics of embryonic, fetal, and adult stem cells in animals, particularly mice. Enormous progress has been made in understanding how adult stem cells work. For example, it is becoming clear that adult stem cells work in consortium with other cells, in "stem cell niches" in tissues. The details of how other cells interact and regulate stem cells are being published. The molecular biology of embryonic stem cells is also going well. Please note that although Nanog and several other stem cell genes were discovered in Europe, a number of important genes were discovered in the United States and the bulk of the best molecular biology work is still being done here.

So, the verdict is that we are not hopelessly behind. Ten years is a bit pessimistic but would be likely if the government continues to interfere with stem cell research. However, I think that we are beginning to pull out of what seemed like an imminent crash and burn situation.

Wise.

[rickhemi]

We should thank Bush

The G.W Bush administration for this, they have set us back years.

Had Clinton and Blair had their way back in 2000 we would be years ahead right now.

Bush has done more for 'stem cell research' than any other sitting president in the history of our country. And the final chapter has not yet been written.

Stay tuned.

[Steven Edwards]

Shwetarose,

It's also important to note that non-stem cell (adult or embryonic) therapies are making great strides, especially in learning to interfere with growth inhibitors. Nogo-66 receptor inhibitors are one example.

[jayday9]

Bush has done more for 'stem cell research' than any other sitting president in the history of our country. And the final chapter has not yet been written.

Stay tuned.

rick....thats a deceiving comment.....propaganda.....thats like saying FDR did more than any president to lift the country out of the depression (which he did, bush has only put limits)....but he was only the 2nd president to deal with the great depression

stem cell research is still fairly new....especially in humans....so saying bush has done more is deceiving, as there is no real precedent to compare it to....

i hope he does more to help, than hinder in the next few years.....scary thoughts though....

[rickhemi]

rick....thats a deceiving comment.....propaganda.....thats like saying FDR did more than any president to lift the country out of the depression (which he did, bush has only put limits)....but he was only the 2nd president to deal with the great depression

stem cell research is still fairly new....especially in humans....so saying bush has done more is deceiving, as there is no real precedent to compare it to....

i hope he does more to help, than hinder in the next few years.....scary thoughts though....

Compare him to Clinton. Yes, stem cell research was around then too.

Bush limited the lines of cells to be destroyed, but approved the funding and research.

I think more is on the way, but make sure you give credit where credit is due.

[sbdspray]

no, it isn't!

no, it isn't..it's likely going to be at the very, very least 20 years at best in the U.S. Around the world however, I don't have any idea. NIH, UCSF, U of Wisconsin, and Stanford Bioethicists are even more pessimistic in time frames, even until clinical trials. We are at the mercy of people who think they know better, they know how the system works, and since they are all certified medically, have control over the situation, and none have any interest in shaking up the status quo, or have any inkling of a care about the whining injured, 'cause if they did, people would be in tirals right now. I'm sick of hearing about the govt. dragging it's feat, it's the researchers, and the NIH who have the rotten attitude. Dr. Leon Kaass, during every lecture this JACKOFF, MISERABLE CUNT gives, drives home the point that trials and applications for stem cells are decades and decades and decades away. Anyone who doesn't believe me, just download one of his slippery slope speeches all around the country. Dr. Thomson thinks he's become some Bill Gates like pariah in the field, when in reality he feels since he discovered them, his job is done, and he'll go down in history. Yeah, he'll go down as an IMPOTENT, MEEK, LIGHTWIEGHT. And to the majority of FAGGOT profs at UCSF, they're so busy arranging new course schedules for this research, that they barely have time to visit THE QUEER BATHHOUSES, yeah, that's you DR. JASMIN! Meanwhile bioethicists are SNIVELING LIKE PIGS to try to put meaning in their previous PATHETIC CAREER CHOICES, by soaking up their moment in the sun. Meanwhile the only people who give a damn are at Miami Project, Rutgers, and a minority few at Yale and Harvard, and some of the PATHETIC little biotechnology companies. I got an idea, this Halloween go to kansas and go to THE BROWNBACKS front door dressed as little stem cells, and then throw a old, rusty wheelchair through their TASTEFULLY CONSERVATIVE frunt window.
My advice, GO EAST, YOUNG MAN, FAR, FAR EAST to the other side of the world, 'cause 'round here partner, we've got REDNECKS and Catholic leaders like DR. JAMES DOBSON, who when not trying to ban all embryonic stem cell research, is PATROLLING HIS PARISH FOR YOUNG, CONFUSED, AND CONFLICTED BOYS TO PLAY WITH!

[Salimacatwoman]

On June 25th,was published at MSNBC an article about Stem Cell Research and the facts about having a "fast treatment/therapy" available for the people who need it,and well we must be real,and understand that if Stem Cell is still being researched and tested on animals,it's obvious there won't be any available cure any soon.

The article will disappoint some people who wish to find a cure for any kind of disease or SCI,this article also confirms my idea and theory about the almost "no possible" option for having a cure for SCI any soon,and maybe until 20 years more,the results of the researches made nowadays will start to show and be used on the first developed therapies,it's still a good promise for all of us disabled people.

We only have to wait and accept what reality is,I am the first one wishing there will be a real cure for SCI already or ASAP,but there isn't anything yet.

Stem cell pioneer does a reality check...

[bigbob]

Why? Why? Why?

Who cares what Bush or Clinton think? Does it really matter who is right or wrong if you put the cure ahead of your party of choice? Do you got your own individual beliefs or must you rally behind a party? Same thing goes for those that try to sell a softer idea such as a cure without stem cells, Why?
Maybe there are too many followers and not enough advocates. I don't think so, I think we just don't have the right formula yet, or there is too much hostility toward those who want to take the giant step and go forward with kick ass advocacy. Like I said before lets get a bus and visit Bush, or even Clinton, or park it in front of the NIH, and I will be there. No more parties, or hotels with big bars and pictures of after the..........

We need strong advocacy!

I also wonder why some talk alternatives, why, its not your decision anyway. What would be a proper decision is I want a cure, let them at the top work it out. Alternatives split the community.

Sometimes I think some of you are more concerned if Clinton looks good or Bush looks good than you care about a cure.

[Isildur]

i think that in less than 10 years there will be a treatment that can restore my full arm function and i will be independent. walk can wait 20 years. walking with 44 isn´t bad.

[bigbob]

i think that in less than 10 years there will be a treatment that can restore my full arm function and i will be independent. walk can wait 20 years. walking with 44 isn´t bad.

Isildur, why you so easy on them?

Cure should have been here already, no?

[Isildur]

Isildur, why you so easy on them?

Cure should have been here already, no?

bigbob, its only a ironic commentary. i see some negativity some times in this forum.
20 years??? its a insult to our intelligence. we must to stop to ask and start to demand.

[jayday9]

Compare him to Clinton. Yes, stem cell research was around then too.

Bush limited the lines of cells to be destroyed, but approved the funding and research.

I think more is on the way, but make sure you give credit where credit is due.

i dont care if it was bush, clinton, or whoever....my political beliefs aside, in my opinion, not enough is being done....

i hope you are right that more will be done....but it doesnt look promising with bush's veto looming.....

i only give credit when i believe credit is due......