Yale: One More Step Closer to Stem Cells (new. not the AA findings)

[NeedHairASAP]

How to tell good stem cells from the bad: Yale researchers answer key question
Posted: September 5, 2014 at 1:50 am

The promise of embryonic stem cell research has been thwarted by an inability to answer a simple question: How do you know a good stem cell from a bad one?

Yale researchers report in the Sept. 4 issue of the journal Cell Stem Cell that they have found a marker that predicts which batch of personalized stem cells will develop into a variety of tissue types and which will develop into unusable placental or tumor-like tissues.

Scientists have been unable to capitalize on revolutionary findings in 2006 that adult cells could be made young again with the simple introduction of four factors. Hopes were raised that doctors would soon have access to unlimited supplies of a patients own iPSCs induced pluripotent stem cells that could be used to repair many types of tissue damage. However, efforts to direct these cells to therapeutic goals have proved difficult. Many attempts to use cells clinically have failed because they form tumors instead of the desired tissue.

The team of Yale Stem Cell Center researchers led by senior author Andrew Xiao identified a variant histone a protein that helps package DNA which can predict the developmental path of iPSC cells in mice. An accompanying paper in the same journal by researchers at the Whitehead Institute at MIT and Hebrew University in Israel also identifies at different marker that also appears to predict stem cell fate.

The trend is to raise the standards and quality very high, so we can think about using these cells in clinic, Xiao said. With our assay, we have a reliable molecular marker that can tell what is a good cell and what is a bad one.

Lead author of the paper is Tao Wu of Yale.

Research is funded by Yale and Connecticut Stem Cell Foundation.

Visit link:
How to tell good stem cells from the bad: Yale researchers answer key question

[JZA70]

One step closer, 1000 more to go. This generation won't benefit from any of these findings.

[hellouser]

Here's a crazy idea!

Instead of dicking around with these findings for the next 10 years on mice, why not try this shit on humans!? Or is that too f***ing crazy of an idea? I mean, not like mice and rats have enough ways of growing hair, huh?

[sdsurfin]

Here's a crazy idea!

Instead of dicking around with these findings for the next 10 years on mice, why not try this shit on humans!? Or is that too f***ing crazy of an idea? I mean, not like mice and rats have enough ways of growing hair, huh?

Sure, let's try them on you along with the mice. You'll have fun with all the tumors and unwanted results that occur like when they ****ed around with the sonic hedgehog gene.

[beetee]

Like all the stem cell stuff, the significance of any individual study isn't known until it's been more widely replicated, and each is just one piece in a very large puzzle which I don't think anyone can say will be solved in our lifetime. That being said, this is definitely one of the pieces that a lot seems to hinge on, so as far as these things go this is good news.

[hellouser]

Sure, let's try them on you along with the mice. You'll have fun with all the tumors and unwanted results that occur like when they ****ed around with the sonic hedgehog gene.

If they cause tumors, then you're suggesting that it HAS been tried on humans.

So which is it?

[cichlidfort]

If they cause tumors, then you're suggesting that it HAS been tried on humans.

So which is it?

Honestly this seems like the long way to fix the hair problem. Let's get to the damn point and figure this out already.

[sdsurfin]

If they cause tumors, then you're suggesting that it HAS been tried on humans.

So which is it?

Messing with the sonic hedgehog gene produced tumors in mice, which is why they never tested it on humans. the point is that you can't just test directly on humans before you know if it's safe. Your complaining about the FDA etc is absolute hogwash, these things exist for a reason. The only thing holding research back is a lack of funds and a lack of interest from big companies. If no one is interested in funding something, it usually means that it doesn't work very well (i.e. adorns) Money is the key to everything. If a drug works, the FDA has no problem pushing it through. Just look at propecia, its dangerous as hell and it still passed. They just fast tracked a cancer drug for melanoma that works really well, and it'll probably take only a year or two as opposed the usual decade or so. These people are doing their jobs to their best ability.

[ShookOnes]

Here's a crazy idea!

Instead of dicking around with these findings for the next 10 years on mice, why not try this shit on humans!? Or is that too f***ing crazy of an idea? I mean, not like mice and rats have enough ways of growing hair, huh?

what degree did u get from college to think its this easy

[locke999]

Messing with the sonic hedgehog gene produced tumors in mice, which is why they never tested it on humans. the point is that you can't just test directly on humans before you know if it's safe. Your complaining about the FDA etc is absolute hogwash, these things exist for a reason. The only thing holding research back is a lack of funds and a lack of interest from big companies. If no one is interested in funding something, it usually means that it doesn't work very well (i.e. adorns) Money is the key to everything. If a drug works, the FDA has no problem pushing it through. Just look at propecia, its dangerous as hell and it still passed. They just fast tracked a cancer drug for melanoma that works really well, and it'll probably take only a year or two as opposed the usual decade or so. These people are doing their jobs to their best ability.

Telling this to Hellouser is pointless. He always complain about the FDA, biotechs, researchers, the world, the universe for his problem with hairloss and when someone like you bring up a valid point, he picks out a small comment out of the entire post and argue against it, and not acknowledging the whole post or he completely ignore the post and comes back 5 days later to make the same complaints.

[hellouser]

The complacency is strong in this thread.

[NeedHairASAP]

what degree did u get from college to think its this easy

art or graphic design. I think hellrouser is a photographer/scientist

[inbrugge]

I'm more interested in the chemical balance of the scalp rather than the stem cell route. Not a scientist, but it feels like if the correct causes are located than a simple targeted pill should allow for hair to regrow on the scalp again.

And I mean targeted, not a shot in the dark like fin which targets DHT and hopes the effects that trickle down equals hair growth.