Treating Diabetes With Stem Cells

By | April 12, 2007

This is just fantastic news:

Diabetics using stem-cell therapy have been able to stop taking insulin injections for the first time, after their bodies started to produce the hormone naturally again.

In a breakthrough trial, 15 young patients with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes were given drugs to suppress their immune systems followed by transfusions of stem cells drawn from their own blood.

The results show that insulin-dependent diabetics can be freed from reliance on needles by an injection of their own stem cells. The therapy could signal a revolution in the treatment of the condition…

The researches stop short of calling this a cure. Perhaps oral medication will still be required. But what an improvement this will be.

But then, the article gets weirdly political:

The findings were released to reporters yesterday as the future of US stem-cell research was being debated in Washington.

Stem cells are immature, unprogrammed cells that have the ability to grow into different kinds of tissue and can be sourced from people of all ages.

Previous studies have suggested that stem-cell therapies offer huge potential to treat a variety of diseases such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and motor neuron disease. A study by British scientists in November also reported that stem-cell injections could repair organ damage in heart attack victims.

But research using the most versatile kind of stem cells — those acquired from human embryos — is currently opposed by powerful critics, including President Bush.

I fail to see the logic in using a breakthrough in adult stem cell research to bash Bush’s position on embryonic stem cell research.

Bush supports the type of research that led to this breakthrough. I’m sure he’ll celebrate this victory. He’ll probably use this occasion to make the point (wrongly in my opinion) that only adult stem cells hold promise.

I’ve witnessed similar confusion from the other side of the political spectrum. It was a pastor preaching the evils of “stem cell research” without bothering to mention that “hey, I’ve got no problem with adult stem cell research.”

When partisans confuse adult stem cell research with embryonic stem cell research, I’m tempted to question either their intellect or their intellectual honesty.

Of course if scientist want to confuse the two by getting adult stem cells to become embryonic stem cells, then more power to ‘em.

  • Phil Bowermaster

    When partisans confuse adult stem cell research with embryonic stem cell research, I’m tempted to question either their intellect or their intellectual honesty.

    Once politics starts driving the discussion, there’s generally plenty of room to question both.

    Researchers continue to work on “creating” embryonic stem cells out of adult ones. When such cells are eventually used to treat someone with a spinal cord injury or advanced Parkinson’s (faster, please!) I wonder how much attention the source of those cells will get?