AdultStemCell.com

Janet Angel asked:


You would think that having artificial hearts available in the USA would cause other nations to look at us as the greatest lifesavers in the world when it comes to heart patients who would have no chance for survival without one. Well, as it turns out, Thailand is actually engaged in therapy that is saving the lives of heart disease patients by using something you may not know exists…I know I hadn’t heard about it. This therapy, although experimental is proving to be an incredible tool and one that will be getting alot more press in the months ahead. What is this “hush-hush” procedure? Stem Cell therapy! No – not using someone else’s stem cells, YOUR OWN! That’s right – and it sounds fascinating. Here’s the story:

I met a courteous man by the name of Al recently who picked me up in a limousine to take me to the airport. Nice guy and in his late sixties. He looked very healthy and we began talking about wellness and natural healh. We talked about how he eats healthfully and why he is so intent upon doing everything possible to stay well. Apparently, Al wasn’t always so healthy because he had severe heart and valve damage. He explained that he would have died if he hadn’t discovered the new procedure being offered in Thailand.

He and others have opted to leave the American medical care scene to seek treatments only available in that country where there are no regulations governing experimental treatments that offer promise. Risky? Maybe…but he feels the risk was worth it. Is it right for you? You need to do some research and ask alot of questions.

Thailand’s stem cell treatment avoids the controversy surrounding ethics involving the use of stems cells from outside donors where human embryos are destroyed to collect the cells. Instead Thailand seems to have developed a method of extracting and harvesting stem cells from the patients own blood. Amazing? It sure is.

Al continued his story, telling me that he flew to Thailand at a total cost of approximately $30,000 to have the procedure. Somehow the patient’s own stem cells are harvested by chemically “shaking them” loose from the bone marrow of the patients and then extracting them from their blood by a special process.

The stem cells, after processing are reintroduced into the patient’s body. After reintroduction, they begin the process of rebuilding the heart tissue and/or valves. Like many of the others having this procedure, Al had a difficult time walking from his driveway into his home. He is now riding his bike daily, lifts suitcases (he easily put my 40lb bag in the trunk) and lives quite an normal life. His family is happy he made the choice.In these procedures, stem cells are extracted from a patient’s own blood, cultured in a lab and implanted directly into the blocked coronary artery or, when no artery is available, into the scarred area in the heart. The goal is to rebuild heart muscle and/or improve blood flow. About 350 patients have been treated so far.

More than 400 cardiologists and other healthcare workers are attending a conference to be held in South Wales. The medical conference will highlight the latest advances in stem cell research and how it can repair heart tissue. There is also a possibility that this procedure may be available in the coming months in Canada and other countries.

Apparently, this personal stem cell treatment may be the solution to help reverse certain auto-immune diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and others. Some doctors in Thailand are using stem cell enriched fat for breast reconstruction procedures. Stem cells seem to help grow new blood vessels in the fat creating new living cells inside the breast. Researchers are saying that this breast tissue is more normal to the touch and can help to repair the breast dents found after lumpectomies and other procedures. It does take longer than implants to get good results but they are hopeful that eventually, using the person’s own stem cells may be the best solution. octors in Brazil are using similar techniques successfully to treat Type I Diabetic Patents. It seems that in a small group of diabetics 14 out of 15 patients have been able to stop daily insulin injections. More is on the horizon.

If you or someone you know is suffering with heart disease do whatever you can to help yourself stay well. Follow your doctor’s recommendations, eat healthfully, exercise as you are allowed or instructed to, and continue to do your own research. I find that most often doctors have very little time to investigate what is happening in other countries. Wisely, they also will try to prevent their patients from rushing off to other countries where there is no scientific basis for the procedure or therapies offered. In this case, I think your doctor might want to learn more about this new stem cell research. Perhaps your physician can speak with doctors at the Thailand clinic on your behalf to get important details. Do alot of research before you make a decision to participate in this or any other therapy outside of the USA. Talk with patients who have undergone treatment as well as the doctors who provide it.

I think we owe the medical scientists a great deal of thanks all around the world. Perhaps eventually all nations will work together to bring the most efficient and effective discoveries to those who need them. Hadn’t I learned about this technique from my limo driver, I would not have known about it…it didn’t make the front page news. Valuable discoveries like this should be highlighted immediately and taught to medical teams all around the world. But, before you make your decision please do as much research as possible, look at every other reasonable option you have here in the USA, talk with your doctors, your family, and other health care authorities. No doubt you can probably find patients who have undergone the treatment by searching on line or by asking the clinic in Thailand for patient referrals.

Wishing you wellness.

Ollie Rush asked:


There are miracles hidden in stem cell research. Vehemently condemned by an uncompromising few, stem cell research holds the very keys to life we continue to look for. Though grounds for condemning stem cell research are well founded, the question of the value of life arises. Just how much importance does man place on life? The promising attributes of stem cell research are astounding. The real battle lies in penetrating the walls of resistance that have been put up to deny us the benefits of this great wonder of science.

One prominent religious figure says…do not use embryos in stem cell research. I can see and agree with his stance against use of human embryos. The destruction of human embryos,whether to acquire stem cells or for any other purpose contradicts the purported intent of researchers,legislators and public health officials to promote human welfare.

The church supports research on adult cells and even promising alternatives to embryonic research, like use of amniotic fluid protective fetuses in the uterus. Here we see some alternatives to embryonic stem cell research.

1. Therapeutic cloning no longer needed. Cloning is the use of technology to make an exact genetic copy of a living organism. That being said, the question arises. Is this scientific research overstepping boundaries not pleasing to God? The answer to cures for many ailments lies within the yes or no answer to this question.

Adult stem cells are more effective than embryonic stem cells in blood formation. Here are some promising advances.

1. Adult bone marrow stem cells show immune tolerance,not rejected.

2. They are stimulated to form insulin-secreting pancreatic cells..great for diabetics

3. Adult bone marrow stem cells can repair retina, prevent blindness, grow new blood vessels.

4. Adult liver stem cells make pancreatic cells, reverse hyperglycemia in diabetic mice.

5. Adult bone marrow stem cells transformed into functional liver cells

6. Form blood vessels

7. Adult muscle stem cells form multiple tissues:regenerate dystrophic muscle. Repair heart damage, form heart muscle,form kidney tissue, decrease parkinson’s symptoms, spinal cord regeneration. New corneas grown from patients own stem cells.

Can we afford to continue avoiding this issue? We have here the key to the door of medical miracles…Open it! Heart tissue may be regenerated from a heart stem cell. Stem cells from liver form heart tissue.

I dare allow you to form your own decision. Only do not wait too long,it may come a time you find yourself in the shoes of others. What do I mean by shoes of others? Do not wait until you are at death’s door before you realize the importance of what we already have but will not use because of offense’s sake!

Nick Poulios asked:


Anti-aging treatments are pursued by many different types of patients. These patients can be healthy or otherwise in need for a therapy for a particular disease related to the natural aging process. The entire cohort of patients falls into three different categories that can be freely described as follows:

The “Blown Horse” Syndrome:

These patients have work habits that have negatively affected their quality of life due to stresses and work overload. This group usually includes company executives and top managers bearing high responsibilities and making decisions under high pressures. They are frequent fliers, they often work long hours, have bad eating habits, etc.

The “Baked Apple” Syndrome:

These are usually healthy-slim and lean people with skinny and wrinkly face, who work out very long and hard doing many different sports. However, all the outdoors activities have resulted in more wrinkles than they would otherwise have. Within several months after the anti-aging course, they usually show a lot of progress, their skin becomes smoother, their eyes sparkle, they become more confident, and they gain 2-5 lbs and hence look great.

The “Burnt by the Sun” Syndrome:

These patients have various psychological problems but they usually look well, they are tanned and spend a lot of time outdoors. They often have addiction problems ranging from alcohol, tobacco and even drugs.

Anti-aging therapy of the otherwise healthy patients leads to measurable results. The visible outer effects are achieved due to the inside effects, i.e. improved functioning of the organs. Within one week after the transplantation, patients experience less tiredness, better-normal sleep, better appetite, more positive emotions and improvement of mental processes. Some patients report improved perception of color, taste, and smell, as if everything feels more bright and fresh.

Within a year after the embryonic stem cell transplantation, these patients’ work capacity increases substantially, blood pressure lowers, and the heart rate normalizes. They report 20-70% higher testosterone, aldosterone, and thyroxin levels, lower cholesterol, LDL (low density lipoproteins) and VLDL (very low density lipoproteins) levels. Higher lymphocyte and T-lymphocyte counts and lower CD95 lymphocytes are observed, which demonstrates the immuno-correcting effect of embryonic stem cell transplantation.

Patients with age-related diseases:

This group comprises of patients with such disorders as ischemic heart disease, primary hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic bronchitis, excessive weight, arthritis and arthrosis, functional disorders of gastrointestinal tract, chronic virus infections without pronounced clinical aggravation that are in compensation stage and can be easily corrected with minimal medication therapy.

Anti-aging treatment with embryonic stem cells in this group of patients also results in marked positive effects. Within 3-6 months after the transplantation, the patients report decreased manifestations of diseases, such as less expressive and more rare angina pectoris attacks, lower blood pressure and blood sugar levels, normalization of the amount of C-peptide, disappearance of inflammatory manifestations and gastrointestinal and respiratory disorders. Quality of life increases. Apart from decrease in disease symptoms, we observe very strong rejuvenation effect manifested in the appearance, physical activity and mental processes of the patients.

Aging patients with serious and advanced diseases:

The group consists of seniors with serious life-threatening diseases, such as tumors, degenerative diseases of the nervous system (ALS, Parkinson’s disease, etc.), autoimmune diseases, impaired hematopoiesis, and respiratory and cardio-vascular dysfunctions.

After the anti-aging therapy with stem cells, the patients of this group report restoration of blood parameters, cell-mediated immunity, decrease in or disappearance of circulatory insufficiency symptoms, and respiration normalization. For many patients, this therapy allows them to stay alive and avoid serious complications.

Anti-aging stem cell therapy is the most effective method of revitalization available now. Anti-aging effects of the stem cell treatment are far beyond the capacity of any other modern method. Duration of the anti-aging course as a rule, lasts 2 days.

The above statistics are from a well-known clinic which owns several treatment patents, worldwide. If you would like to undergo the anti-aging treatment at our clinic, for the preliminary analysis of your case, we kindly ask you to go to our blog below and email for more information.

Angela Atkinson asked:


Abortion is a local hot button issue here in Missouri, so as a Missouri voter, I decided to do some research to understand where each 2008 presidential candidate stands on the issue. Personally, while I could never have an abortion myself (unless it meant saving my life-I do have three living children), I would not take that choice away from others, for two reasons.

First, I believe that if one is the victim of incest, rape, or molestation in any form that results in a pregnancy, the woman should have the right to decide not to carry that child. Second, I believe that abortions will continue to happen even if it becomes illegal, so I would prefer that a safe and legal procedure is available. You never know, one of your own loved ones may resort to an illegal abortion if the legal procedures aren’t available-and wouldn’t you rather “not know” about a safe legal abortion than find out your loved one had an illegal abortion and was seriously injured or even killed?

Now, let’s discuss the candidate’s views on abortion.

Barack Obama on Abortion

First, let’s start with Obama’s voting record on this issue. In 1998, Obama supported Roe v Wade. He later also voted against prohibiting minors from crossing state lines in order to obtain an abortion. He also voted no on requiring abortion centers to notifying parents when minors receive out of state abortions. He supported a bill to increase funding for embryonic stem cell research, which some say is a vote to support abortion.

In 2005, Obama voted yes to a one hundred million dollar plan to reduce teen pregnancy through education and providing contraceptives. In 2006, he supported a bill to provide contraceptives to low-income women for free to help them take control of their bodies and avoid unwanted pregnancy. He also voted in 2007 to ensure access for low income families to free contraception.

Now, let’s discuss Obama’s personal views on the subject. First, Obama feels that there is a middle ground between the pro-life and the pro-choice camps. He also feels that it’s important to continue to educate our children on abstinence as well as contraception. He has said that he has no problem with law-makers restricting partial birth abortions at the state level, but that he thinks the mother should have the ability to make that decision ultimately. I disagree with this last statement-I think that a partial birth abortion should never occur unless the mother’s life is at risk.

Obama points out that stem cell research promises to cure more than 70 currently incurable diseases, and this point is one with which I cannot legitimately argue. And most recently, Obama stated that he personally could not determine the point at which a fetus becomes a baby, alluding to the fact that he believes that’s a choice only God could make.

Bottom line on Obama, he is officially “Pro-Choice”, according to the NRLC votes.

John McCain on Abortion

Again, we’ll start with McCain’s voting record on abortion.

McCain voted to repeal Roe v Wade in May of 2007. He voted yes to denying grant money to facilities which perform abortions, and yes to requiring parental notification for minors receiving out of state abortions, as well as yes to making it illegal to transport a minor across state lines for an abortion. He also voted no to the one hundred million dollar plan to reduce teen pregnancy by education and providing contraceptives. He would ban all partial birth abortions, except those which would save the mother’s life. Here is an area in which McCain and I agree.

He voted yes to banning military base abortions. He also supported banning human cloning, but he voted yes on expanding embryonic stem cell research.

As far as his personal views go, he does worry that if abortion is made illegal, women would continue to get illegal abortions, and he agrees that victims of rape and incest should have the right to choose an abortion. These are points on which I agree with McCain.

He feels that if abortions become illegal, we should prosecute the abortion doctors, not the women getting the abortions. He says that if his own daughter wanted an abortion, he would have a “family conference” to discuss her options.

Bottom line: While he is voted “Pro-Life” by NARAL, he is voted “mixed record on abortion” by the NRLC.

Samantha Rangen asked:


The National Institutes of Health has a whole subdomain dedicated to stem cells and stem cell research. It is well worth reading up on exactly what are stem cells and other frequently asked questions. The site is set up to be understood by the lay person, but true to current scientific knowledge. The medical possibilities are many, and the scientific interest is great.

Your body maintains a certain balance at all times. One of the many balances is in your bone marrow. A stock of stem cells in your bone marrow, called hematopoietic stem cells, receives biochemical signals from your body about what blood cells are needed at any given time. A cut in your finger is fighting off a bacterial infection? Your body signals your bone marrow to produce more granulocytic cells such as neutrophils. Fighting off a virus? Your body sends in the “go” to make more lymphocytes. The total life cycle of most blood cells is on the order of weeks, so you must continuously make more.

This balance is amazingly beautiful, “natural”, and outstandingly important to your health. One of the most important aspects of your immune system is your blood. The balance between different blood cells gives your body the edge it needs to stay healthy.

In normal healthy individuals, the amount of stem cells circulating in the peripheral blood is very, very small.

Is more of a good thing better?

There are currently on the market products called “stem cell enhancers” that can show with laboratory results that they will increase your circulating stem cells. The results are indeed published that these chemicals (by the time they are extracted from the original natural source, they really are just chemicals) increase the amount of stem cells circulating in your blood stream.

The question remains whether it’s a good thing to have this happen.

During diagnosis of many illnesses of the blood, one of the things that a doctor looks at is how many of what kind of blood cell is circulating in the peripheral blood, and how many of what kind are in the bone marrow. Imbalances beyond certain norms are considered warning signs at least, diagnostic markers for illness at most.

Current scientific research is inconclusive about exactly what adult stem cells do when released into the peripheral blood stream. There is great interest in whether these cells can be somehow drawn to areas of the body that are in need of cellular regeneration, such as cardiac disease, diabetes, and muscles. There is still not enough evidence for anyone to be able to say that circulating stem cells can migrate to where you would like them, or even where you may need them. There are cases for such a view, as well as cases against. The cold hard fact is that there is just not enough data at this time to draw conclusions.

On the other side of the inconclusive coin, there is a growing body of scientific evidence that stem cells can contribute to tumor growth in certain cases. This alone should tell you to speak with a well trained health care professional before taking “stem cell enhancer” products.

To sum, yes, the products mentioned will indeed cause your bone marrow to spit out stem cells into your peripheral blood system. It remains medically and scientifically unclear as to whether this is a good thing for your body at all.

Sources:

http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/

PubMed Abstract of ‘Bone marrow-derived cells: roles in solid tumor. Minireview.’

Xiong-Zhi W, Dan C, Guang-Ru X. Bone marrow-derived cells: roles in solid tumor. Neoplasma. 2007;54(1):1-6.

Role of hematopoietic lineage cells as accessory components in blood vessel formation

Takakura, N. Role of hematopoietic lineage cells as accessory components in blood vessel formation. Cancer Sci. 2006 Jul;97(7):568-74.

Stem Cells and Neurogenesis in Tumors

Varner J, Zänker KS, Entschladen F (eds): Neuronal Activity in Tumor Tissue. Prog Exp Tumor Res. Basel, Karger, 2007, vol 39, pp 122-129

Andy Kahn asked:


Aging has been one of the bitter facts of life. It leaves none however mighty, healthy or wealthy. In many societies and in various ages people have always been looking for ways to prevent aging and regain the qualities of youth. In modern age anti aging could become a reality.

Aging occurs due to accumulated damages to the body cells and tissues. If this can be stopped and reversed one can prevent aging and regain youthfulness. There are several modern techniques which aid in rejuvenation and anti aging. Hormone Replacement Therapy is one such technique. There are several hormones whose levels decrease with age. The main seven hormones are Human Growth Hormone (HGH), sexual hormones like testosterone or estrogen/progesterone, erithropoietin EPO, Insulin, Dehydroepiandrosterone, Melatonin, Thyroid and Pregnenolone. If these hormone levels are restored then body can achieve qualities of youth by repairing and rejuvenations itself. Millions have benefited by this Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT).

The emerging Stem Cell Research can produce several breakthroughs in rejuvenation and anti aging. Stem Cell therapy involves implantation of stem cells into an existing tissue structure.

There are cosmetic changes which can give the appearance of youth. These include removing extra fat by liposuction, tummy tuck etc. Botulinum or Botox injection is becoming very popular these days. Botulinum prevents the spasm and contraction of muscles thereby removing wrinkles. A Botox injection typically has the effect for only around 6 months.

Weight training is another popular way to prevent aging. Weight training like lifting of weights to build up body mass helps to prevent aging. Muscle cells burn far more calories than fact cells. This boosts energy metabolism. A healthy and peak energy metabolism is one of the basic requirements of youthfulness.

ANTI AGING WITH YOGA

Antony Wilton asked:


Of the many women who wish to alter the shape or size of their breasts, a lot will find the un natural shape of silicone or saline implants unattractive. Thankfully, it appears that breast enhancement research scientists have found a way in which women can in fact grow their own new breast tissue.

This new breast enhancement research indicates that, perhaps within 10 years, tissue grown from ones own stem cells may provide what could be considered as a viable alternative to surgery for breast enhancement.

In a complicated procedure discovered by Japanese researchers, a system was devised to develop stem cells into tissue similar to the fat tissue in breasts, by creating similar conditions to those that set off this process naturally in the body. Researchers then injected the fat tissue into mice, and noticed that after three to four weeks, tissue which was implanted had retained both its shape and size.
This caused the scientists to consider that the same process may be utilised for breast enhancement in women.

This new technique raises the possibility of providing breast enhancement clients with more natural looking breasts containing both smooth and soft attributes. The new tissue will become an integral portion of the breast, rather than what can be described as a foreign mass when comparing it to silicone or saline implants. This is because the stem cells will enable the new fat tissue to form a blood supply of its own.

Results have been heralded as great news for women wishing to have more shapely breasts without the sometimes un-natural look or and feel of implants.
What is also of importance, is that stem cell driven breast enhancement poses no risk of leakage, or other problems associated silicone. The new procedure can also be used in reconstruction of breasts following cancer surgery

Medical practitioners have welcomed these results with enthusiasm, but it will be many years before its effectiveness or side effects will be determined.

R. Sebastian Gibson asked:


Whether you are employed as a scientist or as a company do research anywhere in California, including cities where biotechnology and other medical science is being studied or where research takes place, especially the areas around cities such as San Diego, Irvine, Orange County, Los Angeles, La Jolla, Riverside, Fullerton, San Francisco, Santa Barbara and other cities where there are universities or large research projects taking place in the U.S. and throughout the world, you know that patent laws and patent licensing is acting as a barrier to medical and biotechnology research and preventing advances in science.

It doesn’t take a California patent attorney or CA patent lawyer to say how the world’s patent system is today acting as a barrier to medical and biotechnology research that could solve many of today’s worst diseases and preventing breakthrough treatments, medicines and even new seeds for better crops.

A new report has come out after a seven year study and confirmed what most patent licensing lawyers, medical researchers and biotechnologists have known for years. The patent system in force worldwide is broken and preventing breakthroughs in science.

Without a means for sharing information, blocking patents are causing delays in developing advances in cancer medicine treatments and in the development of new food crops.

The report performed by a Canada based partnership cited as examples of medical advances being delayed as those of HIV/Aids drugs and cancer screening tests.

Of concern to scientists is an increasingly bare medicine chest of new life-saving medicines that are critical not just to the developing world but to the industrialized nations as well to address disease. New food crops are also lagging behind that could help address hunger.

And while stem cell researchers apparently patent the most, they collaborate least according to the report.

What happens is that “blocking patents” act as barriers to research and advances in biotechnology that could advance cancer treatment, new medicines and new crops.

When biotech firms race to file a “fortress” of patents around newly discovered genes, research by their competitors is effectively blocked.

Another example given by scientists is work on genes that cause breast cancer in European countries that has been held up by patents held on specific genes by one biotech company in the U.S. With patients in European countries unable to meet the cost of certain cancer screening tests, they have been effectively denied access to such tests.

A recommendation of the report is that companies should be allowed to form “patent pools” where they could cross-license their patented technologies without losing royalties from their patents. It is also recommended that governments develop other public and private partnerships to conduct joint research.

The criticism of the current patenting system is that it acts more as a barrier than as an incentive to research and the development of medical or other biotechnological breakthroughs.

When a patent office grants dangerously broad patents, entirely new areas of research, such as in the field of nanotechnology, can be cut off.

So long as intellectual property and patent laws act as a barrier from others utilizing and expanding upon one scientist’s research, the laws will prevent scientists from making advances that can benefit mankind. This lack of sharing is preventing biotechnology from becoming the field that it once promised.

Lawrence Ebert asked:


An article by Jennifer Washburn in the April 12, 2006 issue of the Los Angeles Times entitled “The legal lock on stem cells;
Two patents that cover key research areas are setting back science,” discusses patent royalty issues surrounding California’s Proposition 71/CIRM previously discussed in this ezine (“Future Bumps In The Road For State-Funding Of Stem Cell Research,” http://ezinearticles.com/?id=171034.) However, unlike the theme in the ezine, which suggested that patent royalty issues were bumps in the road which could be worked out, the Washburn article suggested that stem cell patents were themselves problematic.

Washburn wrote: “The foundation’s [WARF's] patents are based on the work of James Thompson, a University of Wisconsin professor who was the first scientist to isolate embryonic stem cells, in 1998. But the patents are so broad — unreasonably broad — that they cover all human embryonic stem cell lines in the U.S., not just the specific lines developed by Thompson.”

Obliquely, Washburn suggests that California’s CIRM should challenge the validity of WARF’s patents: “The Foundation
for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, based in Santa Monica, has urged California’s stem cell agency to challenge the Wisconsin patents.”

The basic WARF patent is US 5,843,780 (issued 1 Dec 1998 to James A. Thomson, based on application 591246 filed 18 Jan 1996; the application was a continuation-in-part of U.S. application Ser. No. 08/376,327 filed Jan. 20, 1995. This invention was made with United States government support awarded by NIH NCRR Grant No. RR00167. Thus, if California’s CIRM were to challenge the ’780 patent, one would have state taxpayer money of California used to challenge a patent held by a Wisconsin agency (WARF), based on research paid by for by the federal National Institutes of Health (NIH). It is doubtful that state taxpayers in California or in Wisconsin, or federal taxpayers, would find this a useful expenditutre of money.

The previous ezine article stated: An important message to appreciate is that money from state-funding of stem cell research intended to create new horizons in medical treatment may be directed to paying off holders of already-created rights. It may well happen that there are valid patent rights in the stem cell area, and states working in the area must negotiate with the holders of those rights. Separately, the Hatch-Waxman Act created in 35 USC 271(e)(1) a safe harbor for research used to furnish information to federal agencies (such as the FDA). The Supreme Court gave this safe harbor great breadth in the case Merck v. Integra.

Separately, it is ironic for Washburn to complain that WARF is asserting its patent rights while, at the same time, CIRM will be seeking to obtain patent rights to enforce against others. Although the patent royalty distribution under Proposition 71 is muddied by federal tax issues associated with the planned use of tax exempt bonds, California voters were told that there would be income from patent royalties.

As a minor aside to the Washburn article, the two patents discussed therein, U.S. 5,843,780 and 6,200,806, were respectively a continuation-in-part and a divisional; because neither was a continuation, the remark about the applicant can file a “continuation” with another until it gets approved was inappropriate to these facts. The USPTO is currently studying changes to the “continuation” process, but even the changes, as currently proposed, would not have impacted these two applications. Discussions about the effect of repeated continuations on patent grant rate have been discussed in 4 CHI.-KENT J. INTELL. PROP. 186 (available at http://jip.kentlaw.edu); ironically, misunderstanding of the patent grant rate underlies some of the arguments about the lack of patent quality relied upon in the Washburn article.

Robin Calamaio asked:


New frontiers are opened with new technologies. Sometimes, these advances create ethical challenges never contemplated previously. But, as an added twist, sometimes the research itself creates the challenge – before any new development has occurred! One example of this – Embryonic Stem Cell Research. As of this writing, the stem cells required for this research requires the life of the embryo. Someday, if cures are developed, then a full scale cultivation, and harvest, of embryos will begin – with no end in sight. So, what do Naturalists think of this? What about Biblical Theists? And where do Humanists stand?

The Naturalistic View. The Naturalist is for the life of an embryo over any present, malady-ridden human. Beneficial mutations arise randomly, and the new life of any species has always been the engine that drives evolution. But even more importantly, in light of our impending doom [our sun is dying], any one of these new lives may possess the needed genius to deliver us from our coming fate. As it now stands, a relatively few number of embryos have been exterminated. But even this loss is totally unacceptable to the Naturalist, as our next Einstein may now be strewn in some lab somewhere. And if this work discovers cures, embryos will be grown and harvested. So, here is the question. What is it called when a species consumes its own? You already know the answer. Therapies coming from embryonic stem cell harvesting will be a sophisticated form of cannibalism.

I hear the objections even now. “Are you insane? Cannibalism? Cannibalism is when one eats the flesh of their own kind! Nobody is eating an embryo! They will enter sick bodies by injection, implant, pills – or some way other than eating. And besides that, eating is for nutrition – and the embryos will be used for medicinal purposes! These embryos will be used to heal people of all kinds of horrific diseases. Do you want these suffering people to perish? And what if it is your Mom or your Dad, or child – or you – that can be cured? Your tone will change real quick. And what if ….” I know embryonic stem cell advocates may have more objections, but let’s take a moment to look at these.

Embryonic stem cell therapies will be the consumption of one genetically complete (and unique) human life form – by another genetically complete (and unique) human life form. Any doctor, biologist, or researcher who disputes this physical reality has abandoned science for some type of metaphysical speculation. An embryo is human flesh. It is nothing else and it cannot become anything else. It’s just very small and very young – and not yet able to defend itself.

As far as the “eating” of an embryo, from an embryo’s viewpoint, whether injected or chewed up – this is a distinction without a difference. The embryo’s life ends – with a member of its own species consuming its stem cells. This is at least “a sophisticated form of cannibalism.” But, the more I think about it, this is just plain old cannibalism with a high tech twist.

Concerning “nutrition versus medicine,” our body often uses food to heal and repair itself. And if this cannibalism could cure my Mom or Dad, or child (or me), what does that have to do with anything? Does personal need supplant fact? It might for the Humanist, but never for the Naturalist or Biblical Theist. An Evolutionist (Naturalist) would show little concern if we started consuming the stem cells of cows or pigs … but a species wanting to consume its own preborn? Even the desire to do such a thing sounds alarms in true Naturalists. Surely the desire, and practice, of the cannibalization of one’s preborn population should be a part of self-extinction science. Maybe the dinosaurs started eating their own eggs.

“Ah! But these research embryos are frozen ‘extras’ destined for the dump. And if healing therapies are discovered, any cultivated embryos would be brought into existence only for that purpose.” An assertion like this does not come from a Naturalist. Read on.

The ability of making “test tube” embryos opens a whole new world for the thinking, non-cannibalistic Evolutionist! Rather than growing embryos for harvest why not grow them for birth and unique adulthood? With current technologies, the “test tube” would be replaced by a “rubberized womb” – programmed to imitate a mother’s daily range of activity. And here’s the best part. All the fluids would be completely free of contaminants! No crack babies, no junk food babies, no babies damaged by alcohol …. These newcomers would be free of all impurities – except for what existed in the first two original cells! What an enhancement to evolutionary development! So, what makes more sense scientifically? Cannibalize the coming generation for a current, malady-ridden, older one, or bring all embryos to fruition as they may hold the beneficial mutations we desperately need? For the Naturalist, the answer is evident.

The Biblical Theistic View. Before the advent of artificial insemination, egg fertilization occurred only in the womb at the discretion of the Creator. But even in the “test tube,” man cannot make the egg fertile – much less make an embryo. These “test tube” embryos are simply the result of humans manipulating other human life. Manipulation into life does not translate into creator rights over life. Embryos are not reduced to fodder for cannibalization or the garbage dump. These “throw away” embryos are as human as you and I. Whoever manipulates these humans into life are responsible for their well being. The manipulator becomes – a surrogate parent.

Man will always be subject to the decrees, standards and judgements of the Creator of life. The Author of the Bible claims to be that Creator, and there is no indication He ever intends on relinquishing this position of sole dominion. “See now that I, I am He, and there is no god besides Me. It is I who put to death and give life ….” (Deut 32:39). I believe the “spark” that causes innately inorganic elements to come to life will always rest with the Creator. Man will never figure it out, replicate it, or bottle it.

Once alive, no human can act against the life of another human unless that human is guilty of a capital offense. An embryo is fully – and only – human life. These attacks on embryos are premeditated killings with future charges of cannibalism. “All unrighteousness is sin” (1 Jn 5:17).

The Bible maintains that human life is the most important object in our observable physical universe. It would be better to face the Creator as a lying, thieving, slovenly drunk – rather than an embryonic stem cell research advocate or participant. The eternal punishment will be less severe.

Some contend these “extra” embryos should be used for the greater good – research now and therapies later. After all, these are not scheduled for implant – and will simply perish. This is an amoral position based upon an assumption that the embryo’s perilous plight is now no one’s responsibility. This assumption will not prevail before the Creator.

The Humanistic View. It is only here that embryonic stem cell endeavors have a home. Because the embryo is nothing more than a blob of protoplasm, then anything can be done with it – and to it. The life of the embryo can be experimented with, removed, or given to another human. After all, an embryo is only the size of this period. (Your eye just skipped it.) For the Humanist, any consideration contrary to the embryo’s life – trumps that life. The curiosity of researchers trump the embryo’s life. Cries for cures trump the embryo’s life. Economic gains for a State (i.e., California) trump the embryo’s life. Politicians, who smell the gain of votes, trump the embryo’s life. Any grounds which the Humanist envisions as some kind of gain for somebody – other than the embryo – trump the embryo’s life. The unscientific declaration – “the preborn is not human life” – fosters all kinds of predictable atrocities. With science abandoned and Biblical Theism ignored, the sole authority for valuation is opinion – grounded in nothing. The “substance” of Humanism is thin air….

[Many pro-lifers warned that legalized abortion would lead to an overall devaluation of human life. But, I doubt anyone envisioned cannibalism of the preborn.]

Simon Paisley asked:


Many parents these days are choosing to have their baby’s umbilical cord blood frozen and stored as a future source of stem cells. This article looks at the different ways in which blood and stem cell samples are stored.

The process of having your baby’s umbilical cord blood collected, processed in a laboratory and kept in frozen storage is a relatively new one. The idea is that the whole blood containing the stem cells or the extracted stem cells themselves are available for future use if the child needs any medical treatments which require them. Although some treatments such as those for sickle cell disease, leukemia and Hodgkin’s disease already use these cells, the idea is to also have a stock of compatible cells that can be used in treatments yet to be developed. Since the use of this type of cell for medical treatments is the subject of much current research, the likelihood of new treatments becoming available in the future is high. These future treatments have the potential to offer cures for diseases, injuries and conditions that are incurable today.

The collection and storage process starts just after birth when the umbilical cord blood collection kit supplied by the storage company is used by one of the medical professionals to safely and painlessly collect the blood from the cord. This sample is then transported to the storage company’s laboratory for processing. Some companies will extract the stem cells from the cord blood before freezing the sample, whereas others freeze the whole blood.

Liquid Phase Nitrogen

The sample is frozen in a storage tank which is cooled by liquid nitrogen at around minus 190 degrees Celsius. This extremely low temperature can preserve the quality of the sample for many years. There are, however, important storage tank design factors to take into account when deciding which method of storage to choose. The two main types of tank both use liquid nitrogen for freezing, but use it in different ways. The oldest method uses liquid nitrogen in its liquid phase to freeze the sample and keep it at the required temperature for storage. The important thing to remember is that there are usually also other samples from other individuals in the same storage tank. The liquid phase nature of the nitrogen in the tank means that there is a possible risk of contamination of samples by infectious disease particles if there was one or more infected samples in the tank. The liquid nitrogen can carry infectious particles, such as viruses, between samples. There is evidence that transmission of Hepatitis B virus between samples has occurred while the samples were stored in liquid phase nitrogen.*

Vapour Phase Nitrogen

The other design of storage tank also uses liquid nitrogen, but it is used in a different way. The liquid nitrogen is confined to the walls of the storage container, and only vapour phase nitrogen comes into contact with the samples. This means that any infectious particles present in a sample could not be carried to other samples to cause contamination. In the past, concerns were voiced about the vapour phase nitrogen’s ability to maintain the correct storage temperature when the tank was opened for access. Design improvements now mean that a constant temperature can be maintained in this design of storage tank.

*Tedder R., M. Zuckerman, A. Goldstone, A. Hawkins, A. Fielding, E. Briggs, D. Irwin, S. Blair, A. Gorman, K. Patterson, D. Linch, J. Heptonstall, and N. Brink. 1995. Hepatitis B transmission from contaminated cryopreservation tank. Lancet 346: 137-140.