First use of stem cells in humans show no adverse effects

[clandestine]

"The first use of embryonic stem cells in humans eased a degenerative form of blindness in two volunteers and showed no signs of any adverse effects, according to a study published by The Lancet on Monday."

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2012-01-stem-cells-aid-vision-people.html

While the stem cells used in this particular study are embryonic, personally I feel this is good news regarding safety concerns for future potential stem cell based hair loss treatments for humans.

There remains, however, concern that use of stems cells could cause cancer; avoided in this instance by injecting cells into an area of the eye which lacks strong immune response, circumventing the issue.

"[...]donated stem cells, provoking an immune response, can be rejected by the body or cause cancer.[...] Addressing the biological question, ACT used the stem cells at a so-called "immunoprivileged" site, the eye, where there is not a strong immune response because of a shield known as the blood-ocular barrier."

[StressedToTheBald]

Had the adult stem cells from the subjects themselves been used, I'd approve and congratulate on initial success. But this way, embryonic stem cells - its both unethical and repulsive. Ethical research is one thing but this is something completely different. Once again man wants to play God and we all know how thats gonna end up.

[clandestine]

Not entirely true.

"Scientists in Massachusetts said today they had created several colonies of human embryonic stem cells without harming the embryos from which they were derived, the latest in a series of recent advances that could speed development of stem cell-based treatments for a variety of diseases."

http://www.advancedcell.com/news-and-media/act-in-the-news/scientists-stem-cells-colonies-created-without-harming-embryos/index.asp

But I digress. My posting this article was more to the point of showing its relevancy to hair loss sufferers. Namely, degree of safety regarding use of stem cells in humans. Personally the ethical concerns regarding use of embryonic stem cells does not necessarily concern me for the purposes of this discussion.

[DepressedByHairLoss]

Actually, I know of places where adult autologous stem cells (specifically from adipose tissue) are being used to try to stimulate hair growth. When I started losing my hair, I tried to hunt down any method that I could to regrow it and I came across a few places that tried to use autologous adipose adult stem cells to regrow hair. Unfortunately these adipose stem cells didn't really create much meaningful hair growth and that's why I haven't gone to any of these clinics. But there has been lots of conjecture that bone marrow stem cells have the potential to regrow quite a bit of hair, but as usual we will never know until some one tries it. Stem cells really have loads of potential to regrow hair (in my opinion) since I believe that a lot of them "change track" and can become any type of stem cells once they are introduced in a certain area of the body. Some of these doctors really need to start trying to use stem cells to start trying to regrow hair instead of focusing all their energies on these stupid-ass scarring hair transplant that statistically most people don't even want in the first place. We need something better!

[born]

Actually, I know of places where adult autologous stem cells (specifically from adipose tissue) are being used to try to stimulate hair growth. When I started losing my hair, I tried to hunt down any method that I could to regrow it and I came across a few places that tried to use autologous adipose adult stem cells to regrow hair. Unfortunately these adipose stem cells didn't really create much meaningful hair growth and that's why I haven't gone to any of these clinics. But there has been lots of conjecture that bone marrow stem cells have the potential to regrow quite a bit of hair, but as usual we will never know until some one tries it. Stem cells really have loads of potential to regrow hair (in my opinion) since I believe that a lot of them "change track" and can become any type of stem cells once they are introduced in a certain area of the body. Some of these doctors really need to start trying to use stem cells to start trying to regrow hair instead of focusing all their energies on these stupid-ass scarring hair transplant that statistically most people don't even want in the first place. We need something better!

hey depressed , have you ever used propecia? and for how long ? has it helped your hair?

[StressedToTheBald]

Some of these doctors really need to start trying to use stem cells to start trying to regrow hair instead of focusing all their energies on these stupid-ass scarring hair transplant that statistically most people don't even want in the first place. We need something better!

I agree. Still, sad reality is that all these doctors, transplants, drugs.. hair 'industry' earns billions from us each year, I don't think they're in a hurry to come up with anything revolutionary.

Best case scenario and wishful thinking - if someone would find a way to change our hair related genes. Its due to genes that we go bald, our hairs are programmed to shrink due to DHT, if we could somehow 'fix' our genes, then we would be like people who never go bald because all their hairs are DHT resistant.

Paradox is, even the drugs available now, we are not treating the roots of the problem - which is in genes. Instead we're messing around with hormone enymes, DHT etc. and putting in danger our health in other departments. Propecia may partially cure baldness with some but cause impotence with others.

[born]

I agree. Still, sad reality is that all these doctors, transplants, drugs.. hair 'industry' earns billions from us each year, I don't think they're in a hurry to come up with anything revolutionary.

Best case scenario and wishful thinking - if someone would find a way to change our hair related genes. Its due to genes that we go bald, our hairs are programmed to shrink due to DHT, if we could somehow 'fix' our genes, then we would be like people who never go bald because all their hairs are DHT resistant.

Paradox is, even the drugs available now, we are not treating the roots of the problem - which is in genes. Instead we're messing around with hormone enymes, DHT etc. and putting in danger our health in other departments. Propecia may partially cure baldness with some but cause impotence with others.

you can search for angela christiano.She was an alopecia areata sufferer and know she is researching about alopecia areata and androgenetic alopecia.There are people out there that are trying to find a cure.She said that the research being done for hair loss was close to zero.But it's also caysed by many genes not just one.It takes time to track all those genes.But she has found alot in the last 2 years.Make a research yourself if you are interested.

[DepressedByHairLoss]

Hey "born", I've been on Propecia for a little more than a year and a half and all it's really done is slow down my hair loss. It hasn't done a damn thing with regards to regrowth. I've actually read a lot about Angela Christiano. When I first started to lose my hair, it devastated me to the point that I started doing all kinds of research on hair regrowth. I read about Dr. Christiano's discoveries and I even e-mailed her several times, hoping to get any kind of advice from her on how to regrow hair. She never responded. The problem I have with her is that she is one of countless scientists who make all of these "hair loss discoveries" but always tests of mice but never does anything to cure hair loss in humans. We've just had countless so-called discoveries where scientists have grown hair on mice, but rarely ever do these scientists use these discoveries to benefit humans. I've argued with plenty of people in the past on this subject and I wouldn't be surprised if they popped up again to argue with me some more. Anyway, thanks for the comments "born".
Stressedtobebald, you're totally right. These doctors make obscene amounts of money with these hair transplants so they're not gonna do anything to upset the status quo. Why would they want to experiment with something new when they're already making tons of money on hair transplants that most people don't even want in the first place? If these doctors really didn't care so much about making money, then they would at least try to develop a new treatment that the majority of the hair loss population would want. I agree with you with regards to gene therapy but unfortunately I think that would take a longer time to achieve than we might want.

[Kiwi]

Had the adult stem cells from the subjects themselves been used, I'd approve and congratulate on initial success. But this way, embryonic stem cells - its both unethical and repulsive. Ethical research is one thing but this is something completely different. Once again man wants to play God and we all know how thats gonna end up.

get a grip man!! there is no god, there is no tooth fairy, there is no unicorns or dragons or hobbits or golums or wizards or witches (not that it stopped the god botherers burning real people alive once upon a time - unlike the fables in the bible that aren't actually true). Can you imagine the pain that would have caused.... being burnt to a crisp.

why is embryonic stem cell usage so repulsive compared to adult stem cells? in your words. not some priests words. or something somebody told you, and not the words you read on some brainwashing christian news site - heck i guarantee it, that if some priest who had too much time on his hands hadnt imagined this up as being evil while wanking over his kid porn, bro you'd be loving embryonic stem cell research just like the rest of us.

man **** that, **** george bush and any asshole that stands in the way of science. you realize that when the bible was written by human beings (about the time when the earth was 4 billion years old) there was no stem cell research or abortion - so why jump on the band wagon huh?

if there is a god i believe he'd be praising us for using the resources on this planet and our brains for figuring this shit out.

i want my hair back. am i being vulgar? yes. why? because that particular interpretation of god that stands in the way of scientific research has no place in these forums.

here's to science in all of its glorious forms. i apologise if i've offended anybody - including you the poster.

[bluesuedeshoes]

Good response.

[krewel]

Had the adult stem cells from the subjects themselves been used, I'd approve and congratulate on initial success. But this way, embryonic stem cells - its both unethical and repulsive. Ethical research is one thing but this is something completely different. Once again man wants to play God and we all know how thats gonna end up.

Here we go, back to the middleage. Men does not want to play god, men want to cure diseases. And if your god is mad of us for using e.cells to cure horrible diseases, he can't be a god.

[greatjob!]

get a grip man!! there is no god, there is no tooth fairy, there is no unicorns or dragons or hobbits or golums or wizards or witches (not that it stopped the god botherers burning real people alive once upon a time - unlike the fables in the bible that aren't actually true). Can you imagine the pain that would have caused.... being burnt to a crisp.

why is embryonic stem cell usage so repulsive compared to adult stem cells? in your words. not some priests words. or something somebody told you, and not the words you read on some brainwashing christian news site - heck i guarantee it, that if some priest who had too much time on his hands hadnt imagined this up as being evil while wanking over his kid porn, bro you'd be loving embryonic stem cell research just like the rest of us.

man **** that, **** george bush and any asshole that stands in the way of science. you realize that when the bible was written by human beings (about the time when the earth was 4 billion years old) there was no stem cell research or abortion - so why jump on the band wagon huh?

if there is a god i believe he'd be praising us for using the resources on this planet and our brains for figuring this shit out.

i want my hair back. am i being vulgar? yes. why? because that particular interpretation of god that stands in the way of scientific research has no place in these forums.

here's to science in all of its glorious forms. i apologise if i've offended anybody - including you the poster.

Although I am not a believer in "God" in any way shape or form currently accepted , and I do agree with a lot of what you've said, your number of "4 billion" is a little off. The Earth itself is thought to be about 4 billion years old. The oldest known exaple of the bible was written about 3500 years ago. The genus Homo diverged from other species around 2.4 million years ago, and anatomically modern humans only evolved some 400,000 years ago. So there were no humans on the planet 4 billion years ago, which I think makes a better case for no exsistence of god. why did he/she/it make the Earth just for us and then wait like 3.5 million years to give it to us? What happend to seven days?

[clandestine]

My fellow members, the purpose of this post was by no means to encourage any sort of religious discussion.

Please stay on topic, thank you.

[StressedToTheBald]

Hey "born", I've been on Propecia for a little more than a year and a half and all it's really done is slow down my hair loss. It hasn't done a damn thing with regards to regrowth. I've actually read a lot about Angela Christiano. When I first started to lose my hair, it devastated me to the point that I started doing all kinds of research on hair regrowth. I read about Dr. Christiano's discoveries and I even e-mailed her several times, hoping to get any kind of advice from her on how to regrow hair. She never responded. The problem I have with her is that she is one of countless scientists who make all of these "hair loss discoveries" but always tests of mice but never does anything to cure hair loss in humans. We've just had countless so-called discoveries where scientists have grown hair on mice, but rarely ever do these scientists use these discoveries to benefit humans. I've argued with plenty of people in the past on this subject and I wouldn't be surprised if they popped up again to argue with me some more. Anyway, thanks for the comments "born".
Stressedtobebald, you're totally right. These doctors make obscene amounts of money with these hair transplants so they're not gonna do anything to upset the status quo. Why would they want to experiment with something new when they're already making tons of money on hair transplants that most people don't even want in the first place? If these doctors really didn't care so much about making money, then they would at least try to develop a new treatment that the majority of the hair loss population would want. I agree with you with regards to gene therapy but unfortunately I think that would take a longer time to achieve than we might want.

I fully agree DepressedByHairLoss.
Instead of testing on animals, tests should be done on humans and straight away to see if there are results or not. Theres always 'researches' that 'promise' a 'cure' just around the corner ! Just around the corner by default always means 5-10 years away, and 5-10 years ago they claimed the same - yet if what they were claiming and promising was true back then, we would have had the cure today ! In the meantime hair industry 'works full steam' ahead, billions and billions of our money goes straight into their pockets each year, its not in our interest but it sure is in theirs !

They indeed make obscene amounts of money. These days if one wants to become filthy rich - consider not banking or politics - go for the hair doctor position to earn millions per year. Half a days work - manual labour only - no material used - easily brings 20,000 or 30,000 or ways much more in Europe for a good hair transplant. Half a days work for a doctor - lifetime work for us average people to save up that amount of money ! I can't afford a hair transplant and I agree 100% DepressedByHairLoss - I wouldn't even want one, I'd prefer a one time affordable cure instead of having to give away a fortune for half a day's work. If doctors and pharmaceutical companies were driven by humanity, help and compassion instead of profits, we would have had a cure by now ! This way, they profit and profit big time from other people's misery and Hippocratic oath should be renamed to Hypocrite's oath.

[StressedToTheBald]

Real cure decades away ?

January 4, 2011
"Dr. George Cotsarelis, chairman of the dermatology department at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine...
"...The follicles that make hair don't go away completely, but they become miniaturized, to the point where the hair they normally make to replace hair when it naturally falls out becomes microscopic and therefore invisible," Cotsarelis said.
There are still just as many stem cells in the bald scalp that can make hair as there are in the normal haired scalp, and that was an important and surprising finding, Cotsarelis said.
...However, those hoping for a treatment anytime soon will have to wait. "Taking something from the lab to the clinic often takes decades, so there's no treatment around the corner," Cotsarelis cautioned. "It's really going to take quite a while to figure this out.""

Why does taking something from the lab to clinic take decades ? I could be sarcastic and say - 'Hire a delivery guy, it will be there in 20 minutes'. Once again, no one's in a hurry cause all are doing fine and profitable, all except us with the balding problem.