Stem cell research is a highly debated medical solution. The reason proponents of the technology feel so strongly is because of the power stem cells hold. These blank canvases split and multiply and when they do, they have the power to create new, unique cells.

For instance, muscle, red blood and brain cells can all form. These small pieces of life can also be convinced to reproduce and heal body organs all from one source. While they are naturally occurring in the body, some auto-immune diseases cause damage that could be reversed if damaged parts of the body were to be replaced on a cellular level and stem technology can provide that option in some cases.

Debates around the technology started occurring when embryonic sources were used to retrieve stem cells. The embryos were considered living humans by some which lead to the argument that research was being done at the cost of a human life. Since then, adult cells have been programmed to act just like their embryonic counterparts. This could eliminate the need for embryo sources.

While there are many avenues for medical research, it is the regenerative properties that intrigue researchers the most. Regenerating tissues, muscle and organs could mean the difference between life, death and healing. Currently doctors are looking into the difference between the self-renewal characteristics of embryonic versus non-embryonic stem cells. If doctors can piece together this human puzzle, they would make one huge step closer to the cure for cancer and the ability to grow the embryonic cells in a laboratory.

It has been proven through an FDA-approved clinical trial that treating heart attack patients with adult stem cells is safe and seems to repair damaged heart tissue. The results of this study, which was conducted by Joshua M. Hare, M.D. and director of the Interdisciplinary Stem Cell Institute at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, and sponsored by Osiris Therapeutics of Columbia, Maryland, were published in the December 8th issue of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

The first phase of the trial intended to prove the safety and efficacy of injecting a formulation of adult mesenchymal stem cells, Prochymal, in patients right after they suffered a heart attack, to diminish the damage to the heart muscle. The sample consisted of 53 patients who had suffered a heart attack between one to ten days before. They were randomized to one of three doses of SCs, each dose compared with placebo. After six months, researchers analyzed the serious side effects that were related to the treatment and used echocardiography to measure the efficacy.

The study discovered that the patients treated with SCs presented fewer side effects like cardiac arrhythmias and showed important improvements in their heart, lung, and global functions. According to Dr. Hare, the echocardiography showed better heart function, especially in patients with lots of cardiac damage. Up to date, damaged cardiac tissue cannot be repaired through any known scientific method, and close to a million United States’ citizens suffer heart attacks each year.

These results will put to rest some of the discussions in regards to clinical stem cell research for heart disease. Although many think that it is too soon to test stem cells in patients, this study has proven the value of exact and controlled clinical trials. The base for novel cell heart therapies has been established.

This trial is the point of reference to advance along this SC path. There are several advantages to mesenchymal stem cells as cell-based therapy; among these are:

- Can be taken from donors that are genetically different

- Are easy to prepare

- Tend to gather around injured spots

It is certainly exciting to imagine what is ahead. Each study will provide new information, new teachings, and new possibilities for the use of adult SC therapies to treat cardiac patients.

Contact your pharmaceutical consultancy firm for more information on stem cell research and the promising future it presents.

If you liked this article, tell all your friends about it. They’ll thank you for it. If you have a blog or website, you can link to it or even post it to your own site (don’t forget to mention smartconsultinggroup.com as the original source).

All the ABC’s of bioethics have returned currently to the issue of embryo research. But first of all, let’s remind what’s the definition of a stem cell.

There are two kinds of stem cells: the totipotent stem cell which has the ability to differentiate into all types of cells, and the pluripotent stem cell which has a capability to give several types of cells. Apparently, the interest of researchers is focused on embryonic stem cells, the only problem is that they may involve the destruction of the embryo.

The researchers are interested by embryonic stem cells, which are extracted from embryos aged 5 to 7 days, i.e., those called pluripotent because they can differentiate into several types of human cell (blood, liver, heart, muscle, etc. ). For Annelise Bennaceur, a french hematologist and director of an INSERM unit on stem cell models:

Knowing how does an embryo form is essential for the understanding of human genetic diseases that form in early stages of development.

In addition, the aim of stem cell research is to treat serious disorders. With embryonic stem cells, the idea is to control their differentiation by forcing them to evolve into the type of cell we want. But there are other sources of stem cells such as the adult stem cell, the cord blood stem cell and the induced pluripotent cells, which are adult cells reprogrammed to treat a specific pathology. Some types of cells have already proven their effectiveness: nearly 10 000 cord blood transplants were carried out in the world to treat blood diseases.

For instance, Nicolas Forraz, a researcher at the Institute for Research on Cord Blood Cell therapy (Lyon Saint-Priest / France) along with Professor Colin McGuckin, at the University of Newcastle, were able to differentiate cord blood stem cells in precursors of nerve cells, liver and pancreas. Furthermore, they identified pluripotent stem cells in the cord blood. Quoting Nicolas Forraz:

I feel sorry that most of the french public funds are invested in embryonic stem cell research. It would take at least a rebalancing of the grants.

Finally, there is another significant problem that those attempting to use embryonic stem cells for therapeutic purposes have to confront, it’s called immune rejection. Because embryonic stem cells will not ordinarily have been derived from the specific patient to be treated, there is a risk that they will be rejected by that patient’s immune system.

Scientists have proposed several different ways of avoiding this difficulty. These include using research cloning (somatic cell nuclear transfer) procedures to generate human embryonic stem cells that are genetically identical to those of the person receiving the transplant, genetically engineering the embryonic stem cells to express certain antigens of the recipient that would counter any possible immune reaction, or developing ”universal” donor stem cell lines that could be used in many different patients. However, each of these methods has its drawbacks.