.Darpa: Unleash the Stem Cells of War!
Most military medical professionals believe that "fresher blood is better than stale: It carries more oxygen and, when transfused into patients, speeds recovery," Popular Mechanics notes. Troops in the field, however, often get blood that's weeks old. So Darpa-backed researchers are working on a $2 million project to "manufactur[e] the red stuff on the spot."
The key ingredient in this "blood pharming" effort: umbilical-cord stem cells.
Wired
It just goes to show how little we really know about stem cells, and how stupid some people are when they pretend to have special knowledge granted from above.
Either that or god likes to kill soldiers.
The key ingredient in this "blood pharming" effort: umbilical-cord stem cells.
Arteriocyte researchers were trying to grow big batches of stem cells when they realized that the growing conditions they used—such as temperature and levels of oxygen and carbon dioxide —caused the stem cells to turn into an early stage of red blood cell. At first they were frustrated because they wanted stem cells. Then they realized that they may have unintentionally found a clever way to produce new blood...CNet, which reported on the project last month, has a bit more on the project. And it should be noted that not all military medical types believe that new blood is any better than old. "At this point, there is not strong evidence to believe that fresh whole blood gives a better outcome," says Dr. David Walker, with the Defense Health Board.
The DARPA award gives Arteriocyte three years to scale up to a self-contained system that could turn out 100 units of universal blood (which could be transfused into people with any blood type) a week for eight weeks... In the end, if the system works, soldiers and civilian patients could have all the blood they need available on tap.
Wired
It just goes to show how little we really know about stem cells, and how stupid some people are when they pretend to have special knowledge granted from above.
Either that or god likes to kill soldiers.
posted by madtom at 3:50 PM
20 Comments:
I have no idea what your point was supposed to be? Has anyone protested about the use of umbilical stem cell research or any other research that doesn't require infliction of sudden death upon a human life? Maybe I missed something.
Yes you missed something. We don't know anything about stem cells, this project results from unexpected results:
Arteriocyte researchers were trying to grow big batches of stem cells when they realized that the growing conditions they used—such as temperature and levels of oxygen and carbon dioxide —caused the stem cells to turn into an early stage of red blood cell.
Which is the very reason we argue for research dollars and freedom. If we had been allowed to work with pristine cells, discover how and why they can grow into different tissues, then instead of relying on dead luck, we could have had enough understanding of the working of the cells to design a new treatment.
But no, we are not allowed to look thru the telescope, because we might see something that disagrees with our values and accepted truths.
This is how conservatism kills.
The human life argument is so stupid, it's beyond belief. cells in a dish have 0% chance of being human, they have the same chance of being human that the snot that comes out of your nose have.
I still don't get your argument. Experimentation with the established embryonic stem cell lines has been ongoing with no limits. In Europe, India, China, Japan, etc. there are no limits period. The fact is, all the advances and discoveries I have read about have all involved adult stem cells and umbilical cord stem cells. If you can find a credible source that claims otherwise, lay it on me.
The idiotic argument is this: embryonic stem cells are derived from destroying embryos-- embryos are, or at some point will become, human beings. I don't know at what point they become human beings, but I do know that every one of us were at one time at the point in which these embryos are being destroyed or murdered. Had the embryo that became you been destroyed, you would not have lived, would you? I don't claim to have any inspired knowledge as to which term best describes the act, therefore I oppose the act on the grounds it destroys human life OR potential human life. And the facts to date show that the use of embryonic stem cells shows no more or less promise than the use of other stem cells, so why even get into the questionable ethical questions on the most serious of subjects? I know it's important for some to think fetuses are no more that tumors, but I don't share that view and never will.
What about if the cells that are me had been aborted thru the natural process? Do you think that every embryo that you and your wife fertilized in the normal way, led to a human being? I have news for you. So nature does not recognize the strict rules you would place on science.
destroying embryos
In a dish! they have no ability to grow into a person outside of the mother. NONE, ZERO, NADA.
What exactly is the value of keeping them in a freezer, or throwing them away. Are you calling it "murder" when they throw the unused material in the trash?
How radical are you?
Are you suggesting that every person that worked a fertilization clinic, nurses, doctors, and patients, are guilty of murder?
Because in every case hundreds of extra embryos are produced and then once the treatment is over, most if not all are destroyed.
adult stem cells and umbilical cord stem cells.
That is because those experiment are limited to what we think can be achieved with those cells.
But the fact remains. The complete embryonic cell cycle remains a mystery, an almost complete mystery. There is only one way to study these things. We have had several stem cell therapies in which we did not know stem cells were in fact involved, related to blood cancers. Was not till recent work that people understood why the now old therapies were working. We still do not have a reliable way to identify adult stem cells. Many of the breakthroughs you refer to in this field can not be used in human trials because they cant be sure that only the cells needed are in the treatment and no means of identifying them or isolating them. This is only a very short list of problems "you people" are causing by not allowing basic research in an embryonic science.
Why were so many things in this world invented here and not in China or someplace. Who know, maybe it's something in the water.
Do you realize that sometime in the next 50 years or so people will stop dieing at 74, and start living into their 150's at a minimum. Did you know that it might be possible to devise a treatment given to and old man, lets say in his 60's, a treatment that will reactivate you original embryonic cells, and that those cells will go about building you a new body from the inside out. making you look like your 20, at your 80th birthday, and that it may be possible to do this several hundred times, extending life spans well into the 1000's...and living most of that with a 20 year olds body.
Bet you didn't know that.
I don't pretend to know the answers, MT. But I do know that human beings have developed technology far beyond their ability to cope with the questions raised and see no reason to go further into such a minefield of potential abuses. For instance, will a company be able to patent embryos manipulated and cloned to perform specific tasks for whatever purpose?
The fact is, money to fund adult and embryonic stem cell research has been held up because of those who demand federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Private and state money can be used to fund embryonic stem cell research and you can be certain that if scientists feel they have great discoveries to be made, they will go wherever they have to go and do whatever they have to do. I don't take comfort in that, but I know it's true.
How radical am I? On principal, I don't think the federal government has any damn business spending tax dollars on medical research PERIOD! I have read the Constitution and can't find that among the duties of the federal government.
Yes, I did know that in theory that is possible and know that just about anything is 'possible'. But is it right? Who is going to pick who will take part in the process? Everyone? SO will reproduction be outlawed or limited to replacement numbers? So which embryo will be allowed to survive and who will set the standards? Etc, etc, etc. I don't think humans are that smart and the changes you speak of will have repercussions we can't even imagine. Wake me in a couple of centuries and we'll see. If we figure out how to colonize other solar systems, I'll take another look...
The DARPA award gives Arteriocyte three years to scale up to a self-contained system that could turn out 100 units of universal blood (which could be transfused into people with any blood type) a week for eight weeks... In the end, if the system works, soldiers and civilian patients could have all the blood they need available on tap.
The same idea could just as easily work for beef, or lamb, fish, or carrots.
Were are your so called values when millions die of starvation every day. Where?
research is research, it does not have to pertain to humans. And I would agree with you that we should not play with humans till we know much much more. But those questions are mute today.
I read most of you complaints about cloning. Yet no one has suggested cloning humans, only treatments for regular humans. Why would the government outlaw reproduction? Sounds like a strawman if I ever heard one.
What could be wrong with making replacement parts. Harts, livers, legs and fingers, and the ever popular male enhancements.
For instance, will a company be able to patent embryos manipulated and cloned to perform specific tasks for whatever purpose?
Yes, as long as they are not implanted and grown into people.
How radical am I? On principal, I don't think the federal government has any damn business spending tax dollars on medical research PERIOD! I have read the Constitution and can't find that among the duties of the federal government
It's called the commerce clause.
Where did I say I oppose research? My stand on federal funds for medical research is on principal only. I suppose it could be justified as a matter of national security by stretching it as most all things are, and as long as my fellow Americans want to continue to borrow money to pay for it, I guess it's more justifiable than a lot of things we borrow money to pay for. It sounds like we mostly agree, again. As for starving millions, they aren't starving because they lack technology to grow food. There's plenty of food and land to grow it on, it's politics that kills by the millions. You proposing we overthrow all the totalitarian tyrants around the world and nation build?
'To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;'??????? That means the Fed government should fund research on embryonic stem cells?
You proposing we overthrow all the totalitarian tyrants around the world and nation build?
If I thought we had the means....
It's the same power Bush used to restrict federal funding an restrict the creation of new stem cell lines for the purpose of the research. That's the one.
It sounds like we mostly agree, again.
You must be going "wobbly" in you old age.
Well remember I don't mean you personally, I mean you people, the mostly religious right. Otherwise known as the usual suspects, which in fact contains people on the left as well.
'If I thought we had the means....'
If we did, we would become tyrants. Human beings are still human.
'You must be going "wobbly" in you old age.'
One of us sure is. You being the younger by some significant amount, it is far more likely to be you. The older you get, the less you change. I saw the light in my late 20's early 30's.
If we did, we would become tyrants.
Which is something that has always scared me. After the Gulf war I thought we might be close. During this whole war there was a little voice inside me that was happy for the insurgents, happy we could fail, I was always scared that we might devise some formula which could make us all powerful. War would become so clean and predictable, just like a video game. But in the end we would only destroy ourselves.
Post a Comment
<< Home