Four old news items about stem cells

{"translated_text":"With a stem and a kind word…\nIn California, a campaign to pass a bill allowing experiments with embryonic stem cells in the state is gaining momentum. If Californians say “yes,” up to $3 billion could be spent on this promising scientific direction over the next decade (only experiments, no human cloning, of course). Scientists hope that on this path many diseases, from diabetes to Parkinson’s disease, can be defeated.\nFor the noble cause, venture capital captains, Hollywood stars and charitable foundations have opened their wallets. In total, more than $12 million has been raised to promote the adoption of the “71st amendment.” A million each was contributed by the families of eBay owner Omar Omidyar and the Sandler billionaires (Marion, Herbert Sandler), Microsoft chief Bill Gates donated $400 thousand; moreover, 22 Nobel laureates have voiced support for the project. The opposite camp has so far scraped together only a few tens of thousands. The money will mainly be spent on TV advertising intended to convince undecided state residents. The decisive vote will take place on November 2. California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has not yet expressed an opinion.\n[IMG_1]\nThe application of stem cells is a very young technology. The cell type itself has been known for a long time, but interest in its practical use flared up only in 1997. So today it is a volatile mixture of real successes, justified hopes and dubious hypotheses.\nStem (undifferentiated) cells serve only the function of replenishing the number of other (specialized) cells in the organism. When the organism is at the single‑cell stage (zygote), any developmental pathway is available. The zygote’s descendants begin to differentiate, acquiring different “professions.” Each step along the specialization path is irreversible, and the number of possible divisions of differentiated cells is limited.\nThus, cells of a newborn can turn into almost any cell type, whereas adult bone‑marrow stem cells (most abundant in the marrow) can become only various blood cells, i.e., they are capable of only limited transformations. Stem cells multiply in an unusual way: of the two daughter cells, one starts to differentiate while the other remains identical to the mother cell.\nThe best‑studied application of stem cells is in myocardial infarction and other heart diseases—injecting cells into the heart muscle can restore the damaged area. There are encouraging results for restoring spinal‑cord conduction pathways. Colossal expectations are linked to the possibility of a radical solution to diabetes. Persistent claims about hair replacement, appearance improvement and general rejuvenation with stem cells, however, are not scientifically substantiated.\nOne of the strongest arguments of opponents is that the most valuable embryonic stem cells can be obtained only from a dead embryo. So far, stem‑cell needs can be met through abortions. Yet even abortion‑rights supporters agree that the number of abortions should be reduced. Could the new technology become a factor pushing physicians toward abortions or creating commercial demand for them? Unsurprisingly, the Catholic Church is listed among the influential opponents. All the more welcome is the recent preliminary report from Chinese scientists. There is a chance that stem cells can be obtained from amniotic fluid (amniocentesis)—a well‑established diagnostic procedure sometimes needed after the third month of pregnancy.\n\nThe new elixir of youth\nKT has written about stem cells many times—as one of the key problems of modern biology and medicine. What could be more interesting than the problem of controlling cellular development? What could be more profitable than a panacea advertised to the general public? Among the ailments supposedly retreating before the new method is old age itself!\nSeveral centuries ago, the most promising way to rejuvenate elderly “VIP clients” was to cover them at night with young virgins. Today technology has advanced, and a frail elder is injected with cells derived from an embryo. Progress is evident: the donor’s age has been reduced to the minimum, as has the degree of contact with the client. Where to get an embryo? It can be produced by in‑vitro fertilization or obtained from abortion material. Bioethicists and other humanists are horrified, but a paying market overcomes all obstacles. In the end, the humane West began extracting individual cells from artificial embryos, culturing them, and then administering them to clients. In the post‑Soviet space, however, esculapuses continue to use abortus material—cheaper.\nHow such technologies work is not fully understood, but alongside researchers studying the effects of stem‑cell injection, there are experimental clinics exploiting it. Unfortunately, physicians using any raw technology are not interested in advancing scientific understanding. So what if we can already avoid cannibalistic technologies? Several methods for obtaining and culturing a client’s own stem cells have been developed. There is reason to hope that reversing certain stages of cellular differentiation is not far off. The latest example: at the University of Florida it was shown that glial (support) brain cells can de‑specialize and then develop along a different path (turn into neurons). This result was obtained in very conservative nerve cells. Stem cells, even those taken from an adult (e.g., from the iliac bone—pelvic edge), offer immeasurably greater possibilities.\nNevertheless, most research follows the well‑trodden path—results are wanted today. California biotech company Advanced Cell Technology announced that it has developed a method of extracting cells from embryos without killing them. One or two cells can be taken from an early embryo without halting its development. Some argue that this method removes ethical objections to using embryonic cells. It gives the impression of yet another way to mislead the public.\nWill cells be extracted from surplus embryos that would be destroyed anyway? Then what is the joy if the donor embryo could continue to live? Will the embryo‑donor be used for in‑vitro fertilization? And why would it be subjected to additional stress? Perhaps stem cells will be used to treat the very embryo (i.e., the future citizen) later on? Where is the novelty then? Blood banks already make money from obtaining and storing stem cells from cord blood collected at birth. There is no clarity whether such cells will be needed to treat that child in the future—what the future will be like and which cellular technologies will be applied.\nUndoubtedly, the future belongs to stem‑cell technologies (presumably one’s own). But that future will not be reached by advertising alone—serious research is required.\n\nSomeone among us did it\nAlaska state police experts extracted a DNA sample from the biological material of a sexual assault perpetrator left at a crime scene and then matched it to the DNA of a person previously caught by them. This would likely be sufficient grounds to incarcerate the suspect… if he had not been present at the time of the crime. Careful investigation showed that years earlier the prisoner received a bone‑marrow transplant from his brother, who turned out to be the rapist (the family, apparently, is quite the story). As a result of the operation the suspect had two types of cells in his blood with different individual DNA characteristics.\nInterestingly, a similar episode was dramatized in a television detective show aired on an American channel last year. How hard is it to imagine something so incredible that it could not happen in reality!\nFor now American geneticists treat the incident as information important for genetic forensics. If anything, bone‑marrow transplantation is not the only situation that can cause loss of genetic self‑identity.\nFor example, in one CIS country an academic institute thrives, offering wealthy clients a modern rejuvenation procedure. The client’s blood is infused with a human embryo that has been aborted down to the cellular level. Scandals, in which some claim that certain abortus material was deliberately conceived and removed to provide researchers with valuable cellular material, slightly tarnish the work of white‑coat specialists but cannot stop it. Curious, what information can be found in the cells of a rejuvenated person after one or several such procedures? What happens to his genetic individuality (should he refer to himself as “we”?)? By the way, esculapuses, wooing potential clients, name many powerful world figures who have successfully undergone such operations.\nOf course, the ethical problem does not lie in the stem‑cell transplantation technology itself. Autologous stem cells taken from the patient and multiplied in artificial conditions can yield better and more predictable results. And there are no issues with genetic forensics!\n\nA beard is the guarantee of health\nRemember what genies did to perform a miracle? They pulled hair from one’s beard. It seems mythology does not lie—hair truly possesses miraculous properties.\nOne of the hottest applications of modern biology in medicine is the use of stem cells. Dr. Yasuyuki Amoh of the University of California, San Diego discovered that hair follicles contain stem cells that can differentiate not only into hair cells but also into cells of other tissues, including nervous tissue. So far, American scientists have worked with vibrissae (large tactile hairs) follicles in mice. However, there is reason to hope that pulling a sufficiently large hair from a human (and hair follicles vary in thickness and size across body parts) could yield the same result.\nCompared with stem cells obtained from aborted embryos, and even with a person’s own stem cells taken from bone marrow, the proposed technology has undeniable advantages. Nevertheless, the new method still requires extensive research.\nEven a tiny piece of each of our hairs contains all our genetic information, locked in keratinized cells. And in a hair pulled “with the root” lie stem cells. The term “totipotent” is used to denote their differentiation potential, which can be translated as “all‑powerful.” How can one not recall genies?\n\nS. Borysov, D. Shabanov. With a stem and a kind word… // KT, M., 2004. – No. 34 (558). – pp. 16–17\nD. Shabanov. The new elixir of youth // Kompyutera, M., 2006. – No. 32 (652)\nD. Shabanov. Someone among us did it // Kompyutera, M., 2005. – No. 41 (613)\nD. Shabanov. A beard is the guarantee of health // Kompyutera, M., 2005. – No. 13 (585)"}

A New Elixir of Youth KT has written more than once about stem cells – after all, it is one of the key problems of modern biology and medicine. What could be more interesting than the problem of controlling cell development? What could be more profitable than a panacea, advertised to the general public? Among the ailments that supposedly recede before the new method is old age itself! A few centuries ago, a promising method of rejuvenating elderly "VIP clients" involved covering them at night with young maidens. Today, technology has advanced, and a frail old man is injected with cells obtained from an embryo. Progress is obvious: the age of the donor of life forces has been reduced to a minimum, as has the degree of contact with him by the customer. Where to get an embryo? It can be grown as a result of in vitro fertilization. Products of abortion can be used. Bioethicists and other humanists are horrified, but solvent demand allows all obstacles to be overcome. Ultimately, the humane West began to extract individual cells from artificial embryos, grow them in culture, and then introduce them to customers. However, in the post-Soviet space, healers continue to use aborted fetuses – it's cheaper. No one fully understands how such technologies work, but already, alongside researchers studying the effect of stem cell injections, there are experimental clinics actively exploiting them. Unfortunately, doctors using some "raw" technology are not at all interested in increasing scientific understanding. And what if it's already possible to do without cannibalistic technologies? Several methods for obtaining and growing the customer's own stem cells have been developed. There is reason to hope that mastering methods of reversing some stages of cell differentiation is not far off. The latest example: at the University of Florida, it has been shown that glial (support) brain cells can dedifferentiate and then develop along a different path (turn into neurons). This result was obtained on rather conservative nerve cells. Stem cells, even those taken from an adult (for example, from the sacrum – the pelvic brim), offer immeasurably greater possibilities. However, most research follows the beaten path – the result is desired immediately. The California biotechnology company Advanced Cell Technology has announced that it has developed a method for extracting cells from embryos that does not lead to their death. One or two cells can be taken from an early embryo, which will not stop its development. For some reason, the opinion is expressed that such a method removes ethical objections to the use of embryonic cells. It seems that this is another way to mislead the public. Will cells be extracted from surplus embryos that are destroyed anyway? Then what is the joy that the donor embryo could live on afterwards? Will the donor embryo be used in in vitro fertilization? And for what purpose is it planned to subject it to additional stressful influence? Perhaps stem cells will be used to treat this embryo itself (i.e., the citizen grown from it) in the future? Then what is the novelty? Blood banks are already making money from obtaining and storing stem cells from embryonic blood obtained at birth. There is no clarity on whether such cells will be needed to treat this child in the future – what will that future be like, and what cell technologies will be applied in it? Undoubtedly, the future belongs to stem cell technologies (presumably, one's own). But we will not reach this future solely through advertising campaigns – truly serious research is needed.

One of Us Alaska State Police experts isolated a DNA sample from biological material left at the crime scene by a sexual offender and then identified it with the DNA of a person previously caught by him. This would probably have been sufficient grounds to send the suspect to jail… if he hadn't been there at the time of the crime. A thorough investigation revealed that many years ago, the prisoner had received a bone marrow transplant from his brother, who turned out to be the offender (the family, it seems, is quite something). As a result of the operation, the suspect had two types of cells in his blood with different individual DNA characteristics. Interestingly, a similar episode was featured in a TV detective show aired by an American channel last year. How difficult it is to invent something so incredible that it cannot happen in reality! For now, American geneticists consider the incident as information important for forensic genetic examination. If we are talking about this, bone marrow transplantation is not the only situation of loss of genetic identity. For example, in one of the CIS countries, an academic institute is flourishing, offering wealthy clients a modern rejuvenation procedure. An aborted human embryo, broken down to the cellular level, is injected into the client's blood. Scandals, in which it is claimed that some of these aborted fetuses were specifically conceived and removed to provide researchers with valuable cellular material, somewhat obscure the activities of the specialists in white coats, but cannot stop them. It is interesting what information can be found in the cells of a rejuvenated person after one or more such procedures? What happens to their genetic individuality (shouldn't they start talking about themselves as "we"?). By the way, by bribing potential clients, healers name many influential people in the world who have successfully undergone a similar operation. Of course, the reason for the ethical problems is not at all in the technology of stem cell transplantation. The patient's own stem cells, taken and multiplied in artificial conditions, can yield better and more predictable results. And no problems with genetic expertise!

A Beard is a Guarantee of Health Remember what genies did to fulfill a miracle? They pulled hairs from their beards. It seems that mythology does not lie – hair really has miraculous properties. One of the hottest applications of modern biology in medicine is the use of stem cells. Dr. Yasuyuki Amoh from the University of California, San Diego, discovered that hair follicles contain stem cells that can differentiate not only into hair cells but also into cells of other tissues, including nerve cells. So far, American scientists have worked with vibrissae follicles (large tactile hairs) in mice. However, there is reason to hope that by plucking a sufficiently large hair from a human (and hair differs in thickness and follicle size in different parts of the human body), the same result can be achieved. Compared to using stem cells obtained from aborted embryos, and even an individual's own stem cells taken from bone marrow, the proposed technology has undeniable advantages. However, the new method still requires long-term research. Even a small piece of hair contains all our genetic information, encoded in keratinized cells. And in a hair plucked "by the root," stem cells are hidden. The term "totipotent," which can be translated as "omnipotent," is used to denote their differentiation potential. How can one not recall genies?