Maliha Hassan looked up from a bag of umbilical cord blood she was processing to answer 18-year-old Nick Rouse.
"How come when a person donates blood they can't extract stem cells from that?" asked the senior from A.R. Johnson Health Science and Engineering Magnet High School.
"They do see them in the blood, but they're not that concentrated," said Mrs. Hassan, a medical technologist for Xytex Cord Blood Bank. Thus the value of cord blood, which is rife with them.
"Because they are so immature, you're able to form more different kinds of cells?" asked Stephen Brown, 18.
"Right," Mrs. Hassan said.
The students are more than curious onlookers at the lab -- they are prepping for a statewide debate next month on health care issues. This year's topic at the debate in Athens is whether cord blood should be sold. Currently, families can bank the blood for their own use or donate it for research. The students, who are members of A.R. Johnson's chapter of the Health Occupations Students of America, won't be told until just before debate time which position they will argue, so they have to approach the issue from both sides.
"So we have to look at all of the aspects of it," Mr. Brown said.
"It also makes sure that you yourself are not biased," said Nand Patel, 18.
While the debate is about cord blood, it is also about stem cells.
"We're also trying to research the aspects of the cord blood and why should it be used instead of other forms of stem cells," Mr. Brown said.
"The main reason why it (would be) sold is because stem cells are present inside," Mr. Patel said. "And cord blood is just basically the medium in which stem cells are suspended."
Cord blood banking has attracted controversy because of the expense of storing it for years versus the relatively small chance it will be used.
"But I also think if you're the one banking it, it is your choice," Mr. Brown said. "It's just like you making a choice in the stock market."
"It's like insurance," said Brandon Hudson, 18.
Reach Tom Corwin at (706) 823-3213 or tom.corwin@augustachronicle.com.
UP FOR DEBATE
Four students from A.R. Johnson Health Science and Engineering Magnet High School will take part in a debate over selling cord blood during the State Leadership Conference of the Georgia Health Occupations Students of America, March 5-7 in Athens.
The Augusta Chronicle ©2010 Morris Communications, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
"We're also trying to research the aspects of the cord blood and why should it be used instead of other forms of stem cells,". Now, that sounds like a pre-determined approach to the question. Why "instead of " rather than "in conjunction with" ? I hope this isn't a teaching trick to set the student in favor of embryonic stem cells only. Government schools do have a reputation.
The application to treat hematopoietic diseaes in humans is already feasible because UEC are similar to bone marrow stem cells. But in rodents they have had some success with treating stroke, and spinal cord injuries. liver injury, and heart injury. In culture the UEC can be maniuplated to form: neurons or glia, bone or cartilage, skeletal or cardiac muscle, endothelium, insulin producing cells like the beta cell, and they are a source of growth factors that stimulate the body's abilities (similar to ESC). The future is so bright you need to wear shades.
PT, it sounds like the students are arguing in favor of cord blood instead of embryonic stem cells, not the other way around. As far as the government schools go, this subject arises in our curriculum, and I assure you that (at the schools I've taught at at least) we do not try to sway the students' opinions. We educate them about stem cells, research the various types and potential sources, and talk about the current laws and regulations. The students are left to debate the issue and make their own decisions.
The issue itself is a tough one. Adult stem cells (cord blood included) are not as pluripotent (meaning they can differentiate into as many different cell types) as embryonic stem cells. There have been some studies where scientists have taken already specialized cells such as skin cells and transformed them into embryonic stem cells. This would obviously be the ideal solution, as it avoids the controversy all together, but my understanding is the results were hard to achieve and may be difficult to repeat. On the other side of the issue, while embryonic stem cells can be made to differentiate into any desired cell type, they have been linked to the formation of tumors in many cases. The other debate comes from where embryonic stem cells are obtained. Stem cell lines are obtained from unused embryos from in-vitro fertilization procedures. Previously, such unused embryos would simply be discarded. THe answer is not always clear, and I am glad that some local students are further exploring the issue.
Actually the answer is clear with genetic reprogramming of somatic cells to produce stem cells or manipulate cancer cells back to a normal phenotype, also embryonic stem cells would have to be reprogrammed anyways too. Another strategy of great potential as an Embryonic stem cell strategy is the generation of non-human primate ESCs through somatic cell nuclear transfer. Scientist frown on using "frozen" embryos to generate ESC because the success rate is so low-that is a myth that is the best source. The main concern of ESC is they will either de-differentiate or transform into cancer cells (which is basically what they were known for by tissue culturist for decades as they are notoriously unstable).
PT your response sounds like a pre-determined implication thet science is of the devil
Bizarro, I agree with you that transforming somatic cells back to stem cells is the long term answer, but this has not been easily replicated in labs (and I have read where some scientists have even questioned those results). We still know little about how ESCs will react in humans, though we'll start to see soon due to relaxed research standards under the new administration. A phase I clinical trial with recently injured spinal cord patients will begin this summer. In the trial, the patients will be injected with ESCs in the hope that they will differentiate into oligodendrocytes (the myelin sheath of the central nervous system). This has achieved promising results in animal trials, though the same results do not always carry over to humans. A similar trial is already underway using adult stem cells (obtained from the nasal stem cells that give rise to olfactory receptors).
Yes Geron's group isn't wildly popular because of the risks and if it goes bad then it would bode poorly for future similar studies. Big risks!!! Promising results in animal studies often translates poorly into human studes. This has been true with the easier and more successful hematopoietic studies like using gama-interferon or other cytokines-which chimps studies seemed so promising but failed to translate into humans.
barstool, reread my last sentence. Your confusion may end.
What is great about somatic genetic reprogramming is the return is much greater because not only would it treat all the applications as ESCs but has the potential to "cure" cancer. What a coup that would be and move medicine from the dark ages to molecular medicine.
No confusion on my part
Hello citizens of Augusta and surrounding areas,
We would just like to say that as far as PT's personal opinion goes on the ARJ students being pushed towards one way, you are poorly mistaken and we would like to apologize for the inconvenience of your confusion. The topic of cord blood being for sale is the topic given to the debate teams to research and understand in order to argue the different aspects of it. That includes both sides of the use of cord blood (The pros and the cons). Furthermore, the topic has absolutely nothing to do with embryonic stem cells, but rather more specific to cord blood. As students, we chose to look at the different forms of stem cells in order to develop more positive and negative standpoints to support either side of the debate. Government influence on this debate and our education upon the subject is nonexistent and it would be greatly appreciated if such stipulations were not made. We appreciate your interest in the topic and we hope that we made things a little easier to understand.
Sincerely,
Stephen Brown, Brandon Hudson, Nand Patel, and Nick Rouse
(The Debate Team)