Home | News | Find a Doctor | Ask a Question | Free

Scientists reset stem cells to early embryo stage


#1

“Having a source of pristine stem cells which can be precisely changed into clinical-relevant cell types is a major step forward,” he said in an emailed comment.

“The benefits could be safer and more clinically effective cell therapies produced at lower cost – good news for patients and healthcare providers.”

http://news.yahoo.com/scientists-reset-stem-cells-study-start-human-development-160534294.html


#2

It makes me wonder if these researchers are great at claiming but not producing. On a daily basis new research comes forth claiming this and that. But ask a real doctor about these breakthroughs and most will tell you these claims are exaggerated. Cots is a good example. Claims his team can produce “abundance of hair” but where is the proof! Not trying to discredit them but show some proof. If I claim to produce an engine that will get 100 mpg, but never place the engine inside of a vehicle, then my claim is futile. Maybe the protocols for researching and grant funding need to be restructured.


#3

Another take on the finding… now if they want to prove it works. Create a working hair follicle, since a hair follicle is one the most complicated organs…but don’t hold your breath.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26209-ultimate-human-stem-cells-created-in-the-lab.html?cmpid=RSS|NSNS|2012-GLOBAL|online-news#.VBP6SGSwJ_g


#4

You are right in that they are exhaggerating in many cases, in order to receive more funding, recognitiion, etc. I myself worked as a researcher in academia (before switching to a research company), but in a completely different field (wireless communication). In order to get funding, publish in good journals, etc., one typically enlarges every discovery, even if it is just a small step. You need to make it look good for the board of researchers that give away grants/funds.

My girlfriend is a medical doctor and she tells me that it is even worse in medicine. They constantly listen to lectures from research companies or from researchers funded by research companies (also a big warning sign) that claim breakthrough after breakthrough, while the experiments they conduct are rarely representative of a real-life situation (either in a lab, on a mouse that lacks many charactheristics that a human being has in the tested scenario, on patients that have other conditions or receive other treatments that affect the total outcome, etc.). The reason is the same as above basically, receive more money, public support/recognition…
Therefore, medical doctors typically say it takes several years (5-10) from a potential breakthrough until it is verified to really be something usable.


#5

But let’s say that they aren’t exaggerating just so we can discuss a different issue about this latest success. Let’s say they can create iSP stem cells now and let’s also say that they can create DP cells from those iSP stem cells. Wouldn’t there still be the problem that the DP cells would not express hair inducing genetics?

I know that some people say that once you get DP cells you have hair loss licked but it’s my understanding that those DP cells also have to have hair inducing trichogenicity, and DP cells that come from iSP stem cells would likely not hair that hair induction trichogenicity.


#6

I think that particular issue might be solved. Remember, its only successive generations of cultured DP cells that become less trichogenetic, after they’ve been multiplied through multiple passages. The first ones harvested directly from the healthy follicles of the scalp are very trichogenic. Just ask Dr. Jahoda who proved that many years ago.

The problem is getting an unlimited supply. If we could make an unlimited supply of fresh DP cells from IPSCs, I think those DP cells would be of the trichogenic kind, not the depleted, poorly inductive ones that result from multiple passages in a culture dish.

The way I see it, it would solve both problems: (1) getting unlimited supply of DP cells, and (2) making sure those DP cells are highly trichogenic.

What I’m saying is a bit speculative, because they still have to figure out how to transform the IPSCs specifically into scalp DP cells… That’s not necessarily a done deal yet. But if they’ve come this far, I don’t think that should be prohibitively hard to do.


#7

The DP cells that Jahoda got from hairs could have developed their hair inducing trichogenicity while in follicles, and only because they were in follicles. It could be that by culturing them they revert back to ordinary DP cells, which is also what you would probably end up with by using iSP cells to create DP cells.
DP cells may have to be produced in the follicle environment in order to acquire hair induction trichogenicity.


#8

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by jarjarbinx[/postedby]
The DP cells that Jahoda got from hairs could have developed their hair inducing trichogenicity while in follicles, and only because they were in follicles. It could be that by culturing them they revert back to ordinary DP cells, which is also what you would probably end up with by using iSP cells to create DP cells.
DP cells may have to be produced in the follicle environment in order to acquire hair induction trichogenicity.[/quote]

Not following you there. The whole point of this new stem cell development (in the article) is that now the researchers have discovered how to create “pristine” stem cells that are completely pluripotent and have the capacity to be turned into any kind of cell… which to me, would have to include DP cells.

“Ordinary” DP cells are highly trichogenic. Those are the kind that are growing everyday in most people’s scalps.

The ones that result from culturing are highly ABNORMAL. Indeed, they’re hardly DP cells anymore. They’re just the useless progeny of multiple passages of culturing DP cells.

Also, what you said is kind of circular reasoning. If you need a follicle environment to create useful DP cells, where do you get the healthy follicles to do it, if you don’t have them on your head?

You could say you grow them in a petri dish. But with what? Part of what you need is healthy DP cells.


#9

Check this out:

http://genesdev.cshlp.org/content/22/4/543.full


#10

Call it circular reasoning, or just call it problem that we cannot currently solve.

Even if they get good usable DP cells out of this, there comes the problem of getting them into the follicles effectively. Ask Washenik about that one.


#11

It will take me a while to read – very long article. Thanks, jarjar…


#12

Excellent article. More first rate research from Dr. Elaine Fuchs. This doesn’t change any of my understanding of the basic premises of the roles of activated stem cells, DP cells, signaling, etc. – it only shows still further how incredibly complicated things like signaling, the paracrine effect, and the microenvironment are in ensuring human culture DP cells are inductive.

In the mass of chemical signals and growth factors necessary to generate highly inductive DP cells, we now have one more to worry about – Bone Morphogenetic Protein.

There are at least 2-3 ways of getting this BMP into the mix, by the way: You can add it to the culture medium, or you can do something physically to the cells that “switches on” the BMP gene, so the cells make their own BMP (hanging-drop culture takes this approach, at least for other known DP genes). The third way would be gene therapy, i.e., actually splicing an active copy of the gene into the cells.


#13

And since we know that there could still be more to discover doesn’t that mean that it is possible that it could take as dozen years or longer for mainstream scientists to solve the problem and get a treatment to market?

And doesn’t that mean that if we want our hair back while we still have some youth we better find a way to get AAPE? Or possibly ADSCs? Although I think that AAPE is more certain.


#14

What’s more certain is regular old hair transplants, if we are being realistic & honest with ourselves.

None of this other stuff seems near human trials IMO. Sucks but I think that’s where we are today.


#15

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by cal[/postedby]
What’s more certain is regular old hair transplants, if we are being realistic & honest with ourselves.

None of this other stuff seems near human trials IMO. Sucks but I think that’s where we are today.[/quote]

Trials?! We don’t need no stinkin’ trials, man!! :wink: Trials are sooooo 1994. Get with it, this is the global age… if a workable procedure is discovered anywhere on the globe (except the US, Canada and Western Europe) tomorrow, the day after tomorrow there’ll be thousands of people lining up at the clinic door.


#16

Why isn’t AAPE that treatment?

Roger did you say that you’re going to Europe in November and while you’re there you intend to talk with the Swiss clinic about ADSCs? If you are going to then why not take a printout of the AAPE study and also talk to them about that treatment?

AAPE is similar to ADSCs but you have a better chance of success with AAPE because with the ADSCs they could drift out of the area before the desired effect has a chance to happen. But with AAPE you are directing the growth factors right into the follicles.

Since the Swiss clinic will culture and implant stem cells I can’t think of any reason why they wouldn’t harvest ADSCs, get the growth factors from them, and inject the growth factors into the scalp.


#17

Not with the Swiss clinic. I am going to the UK, and hope to visit Durham University. More on this later…


#18

A cure that comes from Jahoda’s efforts is 10 years away easy.


#19

Seems to be all over the news. Why can’t someone try this with hair?
Wouldn’t that be the least risky way to go.


#20

I’m sure someone will try it with hair soon but even if a pilot study proved successful it would take another 7 - 10 years to get it to market. We need a bridge treatment to get us through the next 7 - 10 years. The bridge treatment appears to be AAPE. We should be trying to get AAPE now while we wait for other things to come to market.