Shamed scientist's 'breakthrough'

[dipsydoodle]

Source: BBC News

A scientist who faked his research may have actually made a groundbreaking advance - without even realising it.
South Korean Woo Suk Hwang became famous after claiming to have extracted the world's first stem cells from a cloned embryo.
>
But analysis in the journal Cell Stem Cell reveals he may have produced stem cells from human eggs alone - potentially even more useful.


Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6929203.stm

---

BBC have this specifically listed as latest breaking news.

[cornermouse]

1. They're still going to call it life

and they're still going to oppose using them to look for cures. Nothing's going to change.

[Lasher]

4. There are those who oppose all stem cell research.

They're too stupid to realize that there are such things as adult (non-embryonic) stem cells. These same idiots would continue their ignorant behavior in opposition to research on unfertilized eggs, just as you say.

[Larissa238]

8. There are adult stem cells, they are just not as potent.

An embryonic stem cell can form any cell in the body. That's how we can arise from just one cell.

An adult stem cell can only form one group of cells. There are skin stem cells that form the skin, intestinal cells that form the shedding layer of the intestines, and so on. You can't take a skin stem cell and make it form a brain cell.

That's why embryonic stem cells are much better than adult stem cells. BUT I don't know what the deal is with them complaining about killing a life... an unfertilized egg is not life. They might as well call every male a murderer for having them excrete sperm cells and letting them die through various means. But when it's a sperm cell, it's probably okay to let it die. When it's a female egg, it's murder? :shrug:

[Lasher]

9. Yes embryonic stem cells can be versitile, but...

Though embryonic stem cells have been purported as holding great medical promise, reports of actual clinical success have been few. Instead, scientists conducting research on embryonic stem cells have encountered significant obstacles—including tumor formation, unstable gene expression, and an inability to stimulate the cells to form the desired type of tissue. It may indeed be telling that some biotechnology companies have chosen not to invest financially in embryonic stem cell research and some scientists have elected to focus their research exclusively on non-embryonic stem cell research.

In contrast to research on embryonic stem cells, non-embryonic stem cell research has already resulted in numerous instances of actual clinical benefit to patients.

http://www.cbhd.org/resources/stemcells/overview.htm

But that was not exactly my point. What I meant to convey was, fundies in particular are grossly uninformed in general regarding this controversy. Many think that embryonic stem cell research is the only kind there is.

[Igel]

11. It's not quite so simple.

Some adult stem cells can form a variety of tissues; those in fat, for example, can make bone.

But they're not as versatile, overall. However, research continues with them and is funded as is any other medical research.

It's also not at all clear that fundies will actually complain about the destruction of an unfertilized egg. The ones I knew wouldn't, they were, by and large, aware of the difference; but they'd also be suspicious that researchers would pull a bait and switch.

[originalpckelly]

5. That doesn't make them right. I really get pissed at these folks...

on our side and their side who bs about science. Those eggs are not different than any other cells in someone's body before they're fertilized, they only contain a woman's DNA, not someone else's.

[DeSwiss]

2. Oh yeah, I can see this coming a mile away....

'Virgin birth'
Researchers said that the distinct "genetic fingerprint" of the stem cells means they may be the first in the world to be extracted from embryos produced by the so-called "virgin birth" method, or parthenogenesis. This happens when eggs are stimulated into becoming embryos without ever being fertilised by sperm, and has been achieved in animals.

No need for a sperm donor? Dismiss the patriarchy? No mo nookie? Surely you jest!

- K&R!!!

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. This is truly amazing.

The guy must have been a savant of sorts.

[Canuckistanian]

7. Well, you know what they say about great scientific discoveries

Usually, when scientists makes a big discovery they don't yell, "Eureka!".

They say, "Hmm, that's funny...."

[Demeter]

6. Science Is Like That

Serendipity and the ability to observe with understanding is all.

I can hear the screaming about "Jesus' stem cells" already--except it would mean that Jesus was a woman......the plot of a short SciFi story whose title I don't recall at the moment....

[redqueen]

10. That's great...

accidental like lots of other discoveries... only usually they're not faking something when they find it. I love when they're doing something altogether different, and stumble on something else purely by accident.

[Duer 157099]

12. Here's an interesting quote:

"However, scientists do not know how significant the lack of contribution from the father's DNA will be."

I wonder how that might really matter? The suggestion is that there is something unique on the father's chromosomes that enable proper development. That might only be true for the Y chromosome, but presumably not the X, which he received from his mother.

Also, what if the guy didn't even use human cells -- have they verified that these were indeed human? The article says that deriving such stem cells from eggs in animals has already been done -- maybe he used another species, or another primate?

It would seem that this will be an incredibly useful tool, if truly a single human egg were able to be propagated in this manner.