• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo

A Simpler Path to Creating Pluripotent Stem Cells


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 reason

  • Guardian Reason
  • 1,101 posts
  • 249
  • Location:US

Posted 31 January 2014 - 12:50 PM


An improvement on current methods of creating pluripotent stem cells has been in the news the past few days. It involves stressing cells with simple mechanisms, and is straightforward enough that I hear numerous laboratories and individual researchers have started in on trying it out immediately, as well as revisiting other variants of stressing cells to see what the outcome might be. The methodology is something that diybio enthusiasts could carry out as a weekend project with minimal cost and equipment, which is a great improvement over prior standard methods involving delivery of genes or similar operations.

As with all such potential infrastructure improvements, one pillar of importance is the reduction in cost and difficulty of research. When someone figures out a much cheaper way of achieving any particular goal all further work that builds on that goal moves more rapidly: existing groups can do more, and new groups that previously couldn't afford to join in now start work. Cell pluripotency is near the base of regenerative medicine and tissue engineering: ways to better achieve it accelerate the whole field.

As you can see there are also other ramifications, however, such as for persistent reports of pluripotent stem cells isolated from adult tissues - VSELs and others - and the debate over difficulties in replicating that research.

In 2006, Japanese researchers reported a technique for creating cells that have the embryonic ability to turn into almost any cell type in the mammalian body - the now-famous induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells. In papers published this week, another Japanese team says that it has come up with a surprisingly simple method - exposure to stress, including a low pH - that can make cells that are even more malleable than iPS cells, and do it faster and more efficiently.

"It's amazing. I would have never thought external stress could have this effect," says Yoshiki Sasai. It took Haruko Obokata, a young stem-cell biologist at the same centre, five years to develop the method and persuade Sasai and others that it works. "Everyone said it was an artefact - there were some really hard days."

The results could fuel a long-running debate. For years, various groups of scientists have reported finding pluripotent cells in the mammalian body. But others have had difficulty reproducing such findings. Obokata started the current project by looking at cells thought to be pluripotent cells isolated from the body. But her results suggested a different explanation: that pluripotent cells are created when the body's cells endure physical stress.

Obokata has already reprogrammed a dozen cell types, including those from the brain, skin, lung and liver, hinting that the method will work with most, if not all, cell types. On average, she says, 25% of the cells survive the stress and 30% of those convert to pluripotent cells - already a higher proportion than the roughly 1% conversion rate of iPS cells.

Link: http://www.nature.co...m-cells-1.14600


View the full article at FightAging

#2 Avatar of Horus

  • Guest
  • 241 posts
  • 291
  • Location:Hungary

Posted 18 August 2014 - 05:35 PM

Retraction: Stimulus-triggered fate conversion of somatic cells into pluripotency
http://www.nature.co...ature13598.html


Japanese Stem-Cell Scientist Yoshiki Sasai Commits Suicide
http://online.wsj.co...dead-1407206857
Aug. 5, 2014
"A top Japanese scientist who co-authored disputed stem-cell papers committed suicide by hanging himself, police said Tuesday. ..."


  • Enjoying the show x 1

Click HERE to rent this BIOSCIENCE adspot to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3 Avatar of Horus

  • Guest
  • 241 posts
  • 291
  • Location:Hungary

Posted 06 January 2015 - 01:13 AM

It took Haruko Obokata, a young stem-cell biologist at the same centre, five years to develop the method and persuade Sasai and others that it works. "Everyone said it was an artefact - there were some really hard days."

 

Disgraced Japan researcher fails to replicate 'game changing' stem cell results

Reuters, TOKYO, Dec 18, 2014

http://www.reuters.c...N0JX0B820141219

 

  • Informative x 1

#4 Multivitz

  • Guest
  • 550 posts
  • -47
  • Location:UK
  • NO

Posted 27 January 2015 - 08:23 PM

Stem cells are cool and work, but I heard stem cells are a prime candidate for mycol hosting! Couldn't give a link for that one, but I do know they are made in the bodies fat anyway.


  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1

#5 Danail Bulgaria

  • Guest
  • 2,213 posts
  • 421
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 27 January 2015 - 08:39 PM

The science is so twisted and fake today, that you can't distinguish the real from the false. Studies in all sciences are being poured constantly, and since we can't check out each one of them, even in the field of one single science, we can't know anything anymore. The science ain't what it used to be.



#6 Avatar of Horus

  • Guest
  • 241 posts
  • 291
  • Location:Hungary

Posted 27 January 2015 - 09:45 PM

The science is so twisted and fake today, that you can't distinguish the real from the false. Studies in all sciences are being poured constantly, and since we can't check out each one of them, even in the field of one single science, we can't know anything anymore. The science ain't what it used to be.

 

IMHO Every result must be checked out, that is replicated before it can be considered fully valid.



Click HERE to rent this BIOSCIENCE adspot to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#7 Danail Bulgaria

  • Guest
  • 2,213 posts
  • 421
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 27 January 2015 - 09:50 PM

Alright, but how will you (or I, or anyone) replicate each study, that seems interesting. For example I found many studies using stem cells on people. How we (the people from the crowd) are supposed to replicate them all?



#8 Multivitz

  • Guest
  • 550 posts
  • -47
  • Location:UK
  • NO

Posted 27 January 2015 - 09:59 PM

To Seivtcho- Even Peer review stuff has been known to be steered and faulsified. You need to check out EU2014 Electric Universe, and Rupert Sheldrake on TED talks, if you watch that one the interview with him 'about the ban' is funny. I'm in the anti-relativaty camp but quantum shows us things that were proposed over 100 years ago, and as for the 'Higs particle' lol.  Yes if a science show its trying to instill fear or showing off too much it's usually a program that is full of tripe.   Brian Cox is a prime example, he'll quietly state at the begining of his shows that 'its only a theory' then talk up all the BS as if its given fact lol, look him up on utube in off set convesations with the camera men and others, what a peeler. Harry Oldfield will TOTALLY blow your mind once you get over his jovial manner, I read a few books back in the nineties on some of the subjects ;)


Edited by Multivitz, 27 January 2015 - 10:03 PM.

  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1

#9 Avatar of Horus

  • Guest
  • 241 posts
  • 291
  • Location:Hungary

Posted 27 January 2015 - 10:10 PM

Alright, but how will you (or I, or anyone) replicate each study, that seems interesting. For example I found many studies using stem cells on people. How we (the people from the crowd) are supposed to replicate them all?

 

IMO every scientific result, discovery has a current status, for example: reported by a single experiment.

Science generally works by the way of repeat, replication and confirmation. Just like it has happened in the case of this IPSC "result". One group reported it, and others started to check it out to verify it by repeating the experiment, but did not get the same outcome. Then the original scientist were asked to reproduce the original findings, but was unable to do so, as was reported in some recent news (e.g. post #3), and therefore it became false and invalid.

 

Regarding the stem cell therapies, their case is a little different, because in the clinical trials, not one but a number of people are involved, and for it to be positive it must have some of the same effect on the participants, or at least on the majority of them.


Edited by Avatar of Horus, 27 January 2015 - 10:17 PM.


#10 Danail Bulgaria

  • Guest
  • 2,213 posts
  • 421
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 27 January 2015 - 10:23 PM

In brief, time will show which study is right, and which is wrong. Good, if we have enough time for that.


  • Good Point x 1

Click HERE to rent this BIOSCIENCE adspot to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#11 Antonio2014

  • Guest
  • 634 posts
  • 52
  • Location:Spain
  • NO

Posted 27 January 2015 - 10:46 PM

I find this quite adecuate for medical research (physics, chemistry, ... are another story): https://www.fightagi...ific-method.php

 

(Oh, and the electric universe theory is bullshit.)


Edited by Antonio2014, 27 January 2015 - 11:09 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users