[HM2Viking]

Even as regulatory and patent developments follow relatively predictable trajectories, restraints on public funding undercut the route from lab to marketplace and put the United States at a disadvantage internationally. Further, an overselling in other biomedical venues, such as gene therapy, has discouraged risk-capital investment, which is hampered as well by the absence of a trusted business model for stem cell enterprise.

Along with the rest of the world, the US struggles to accommodate the scientific, ethical, business, and political considerations that will determine when or whether stem cell research will realizes its promise. It is unwise to compound the difficulties endemic to this field by foregoing both federal money and federal control. Rather, the US government should adopt national ESCR standards, tracking those promulgated by the National Academy of Sciences, and restore access to federal funding, a bulwark of US basic research for decades.

http://www.vetscite.org/publish/items/002334/index.html

[HM2Viking]

In a study in rats, neural progenitor cells derived from human fetal stem cells have been shown to protect the vision of animals with degenerative eye disease similar to the kinds of diseases that afflict humans. The new study appears today (March 28) in the journal Public Library of Science (PLoS) One.
The lead author of the study, University of Wisconsin-Madison researcher David Gamm, says the cells - formative brain cells that arise in early development - show "some of the best rescue, functionally and anatomically" of any such work to date. In animals whose vision would typically be lost to degenerative retinal disease, the cells were shown to protect vision and the cells in the eye that underpin sight.
The new findings are important because they suggest there may be novel ways to preserve vision in the context of degenerative diseases for which there are now no effective treatments. Macular degeneration, an age-related affliction that gradually destroys central vision, is a scourge of old age, robbing people of the ability to read, recognize faces and live independently.
The finding that the brain cells protected the cells in the eye was a surprise, according to Raymond D. Lund, an author of the new study and an eye disease expert at the University of Utah and the Oregon Health and Sciences University. The neural progenitor cells, which arise from stem cells and further differentiate into different types of cells found in the central nervous system, were being tested for their ability to deliver another agent, a growth factor that has been shown to be effective in treating some types of degenerative disease.

http://www.news.wisc.edu/packages/stemcells/13618

[HM2Viking]

Why not derive stem cells from adults?
There are several approaches now in human clinical trials that utilize mature stem cells (such as blood-forming cells, neuron-forming cells and cartilage-forming cells). However, because adult cells are already specialized, their potential to regenerate damaged tissue is very limited: skin cells will only become skin and cartilage cells will only become cartilage. Adults do not have stem cells in many vital organs, so when those tissues are damaged, scar tissue develops. Only embryonic stem cells, which have the capacity to become any kind of human tissue, have the potential to repair vital organs.
Another limitation of adult stem cells is their inability to proliferate in culture. Unlike embryonic stem cells, which have a capacity to reproduce indefinitely in the laboratory, adult stem cells are difficult to grow in the lab and their potential to reproduce diminishes with age. Therefore, obtaining clinically significant amounts of adult stem cells may prove to be difficult.
Studies of adult stem cells are important and will provide valuable insights into the use of stem cell in transplantation procedures. However, only through exploration of all types of stem cell research will scientists find the most efficient and effective ways to treat diseases.

http://www.news.wisc.edu/packages/st...s/facts.html#5

[DarrenWright]

Originally Posted by HM2Viking

Even as regulatory and patent developments follow relatively predictable trajectories, restraints on public funding undercut the route from lab to marketplace and put the United States at a disadvantage internationally. Further, an overselling in other biomedical venues, such as gene therapy, has discouraged risk-capital investment, which is hampered as well by the absence of a trusted business model for stem cell enterprise.
http://www.vetscite.org/publish/items/002334/index.html

Not sure how this makes sense; how is the US at a disadvantage internationally if another country makes greater progress on some aspect of SCR? Do you think they won't sell it to us? The reality is that now someone else has made the remarkable investment in R/D, similar to what US companies have done in pharmaceuticals, resulting in a remarkable advantage to other countries who are now able to develop and purchase these same drugs at a lower cost.

[HM2Viking]