Breaking News
Oprah Quitting TV Show In 2011

Stem Cells Make Blind Kid See

Yeah, can’t imagine why would want to use them.

Macie Morse was born with optic nerve hypoplasia, meaning her optic nerve didn’t develop all the way. The only way to repair it was to grow more of the nerve using umbilical cord stem cells.

She and her mother traveled all the way to China for an experimental treatment.

For 6 weeks Morse received injections of cord stem cells and acupuncture to stimulate the cells. Gradually, they took hold and began growing the optic nerve Morse was missing.

Watch the video at the link. As the young girl says “why are we in China?”

Maybe now Americans won’t have to travel to freaking China to be cured of these horrible afflictions. Thank you, President Obama.

Both comments and pings are currently closed.

36 Responses to “Stem Cells Make Blind Kid See”

  1. GLV says:

    I know it’s beyond your control, but right now you have *2* of the gigantic “Like Palin?” ads on the front of your site. It makes my eyes hurt.

  2. ed says:

    According to the SaveFarris’s of the world, the little girl who can now see is guilty of cruelly murdering innocent people.

  3. Jack J. says:

    Great story!

    It’s OK, Oliver. We know you feel the same about that empty melon Palin as all of us (wingnuts excluded) do so go ahead and take her money, who knows how long before she goes broke.

  4. Jay Tea says:

    From the article:

    The only way to repair it was to grow more of the nerve using umbilical cord stem cells.
    (Emphasis added)

    UMBILICAL CORD stem cells. Not fetal stem cells. In other words, one of the types of cells for which there have been NO restrictions on research in the US.

    During the ban on federal funding for fetal stem cell research, scientists have managed to make tremendous strides with adult and umbilical cord stem cells, as well as duplicating fetal stem cells without actually involving a fetus.

    In fact, one could argue that the restrictions on fetal cells has spurred the research into alternative avenues that have paid off handsomely.

    One could even argue that the Bush administration ban actually sped up our own quest towards such treatments, as it steered efforts into alternatives like this girl was given.

    I would also suspect that the experimental nature of the Chinese research would have run afoul of FDA regulations, being appplied to a human being at this stage. But that’s absolute speculation.

    Plausible, though. More plausible than Oliver’s favorite Playboy-sponsored one about the tea parties.

    J.

  5. one could argue that the restrictions on fetal cells has spurred the research into alternative avenues that have paid off handsomely.

    Yes, such as research into the cheapest flights to China.

  6. kickingleft says:

    Damned Jay, you almost had me agreeing with you. True, it was umbilical stem cell research. However, your terminology is very much right-wing focused.

    It is not fetal stem cell research, it’s embryonic stem cell research. And I realize to the “chose life” crowd (minus death penalty, war, gun rights, poverty and starvation, etc), it is the same thing and every sperm is considered sacred, to quote Monty Python, it there is a world of difference between an embryo and a fetus.

  7. Jay Tea says:

    kicking, I don’t follow the argument that carefully, so I’ll defer to you on the embroynic/fetal issue. And there is a consistency — choose life for the innocent.

    But back to the topic at hand… it was umbilical stem cells that saved this girl’s sight. And there have never been any restrictions on that kind of research here in the US.

    J.

  8. Rheinhard says:

    I love all these wingnuts who are now genetic science experts (on top of being foreign policy wonks and economic masters of the universe) telling us “Oh yes you don’t need to do research on these embryonic cells because I read an article on WorldNetDaily and you liberal mad scientists only want to kill babies anyway…”

    Ladies and gentlemen, let us hear from an actual card-carrying biologist… (bolding mine)

    The ugly little goblins of the Bush years still plague us, though; compare the uplifting message of knowledge from Obama with this fundamentally fallacious opinion piece from the carnie barker of junk science, Steven Milloy. And by “fundamentally fallacious”, I mean that it’s problems are far deeper than his usual slithery tweaking of the facts to misrepresent the evidence and the science — I mean that right at the core of Milloy is an absolute lack of comprehension of the very nature of science, and it’s right there, exposed and naked and hideous.

    His problem? He thinks his ignorance of the field is an accurate picture, and he thinks science ought to be more like a vending machine: put in your nickel, and the bubble gum you wanted pops out.

    Keep in mind that, although President Bush limited federal funding of embryonic stem cell research to a few existing stem cell colonies, he did not make such research illegal. In fact, embryonic stem cell research has been funded with both private funding and state funding — not to mention that scientists around the world have been engaging in embryonic stem cell research. The results? Nothing notable has occurred in embryonic stem cell research other than the scientific fraud committed by the infamous South Korean researcher Hwang Woo-Suk.

    There is so much wrong with that paragraph. Woo-Suk was a fraud; just because one or a few corrupt individuals abuse the system is not grounds for damning all of the research. He’s also using Woo-Suk as a smokescreen to hide the colossal lie he’s peddling, that nothing notable has occurred in stem cell research. It’s a very sneaky strategy — he’s been a cheerleader for an administration that has discouraged stem cell work, driving many researchers to leave the country to continue the research, or to drop it and continue work in a different field that has the promise of continuing support. You don’t get to hobble the horse and then complain that it hasn’t won any races!

    But of course significant advances have been made in this line of research, it’s just that Milloy isn’t competent to know about them, let alone report on them. As one example, we’ve made progress in understanding the triggers that can induce the stem cell state, work that lays the foundation for turning somatic cells into new tissues at will. This is the kind of work that the anti-stem-cell Luddites want scientists to do, but they ignore the fact that it depends on understanding the stem cell state.

    But the key problem in Milloy’s article is more than just his cocky ignorance: it’s his failure to understand how science works. He keeps on harping on how nobody has found a “cure” for anything yet, but you don’t do science with the immediate goal of finding cures! The purpose of this research is to increase our understanding of how cells work to build tissues, not to poof “cures” into existence.

    If the US pours hundreds of millions of dollars into stem cell research, and the scientists come back a decade later and say stem cells aren’t the answer any more, it’s new therapy X that they’ve discovered, it isn’t a failure. It means we’ve learned something we wouldn’t have known without doing it, that we’ve uncovered wonderful new surprises, and that through it all, we’ve learned more of the basics of how biology works. We don’t know what we’re going to find; if we did, it wouldn’t be research.

    Please read the whole thing, because this shit is important.

  9. Parthenon says:

    What an amazing story. Thanks for posting it, OW.

  10. Good link, Reinhardt. It’s amazing how the right-wingers continue to embarrass themselves by pretending that blocking a major part of stem cell research somehow doesn’t hinder the research in the science as a whole.

  11. Jay Tea says:

    Macie Morse was born with optic nerve hypoplasia, meaning her optic nerve didn’t develop all the way. The only way to repair it was to grow more of the nerve using umbilical cord stem cells.

    J.

  12. Duros62 says:

    One could even argue that the Bush administration ban actually sped up our own quest towards such treatments, as it steered efforts into alternatives like this girl was given.

    Indeed. If only she didn’t have to go to another country to get, because her insurance wouldn’t cover it.

  13. Duros62 says:

    Oh, and also
    Embryo =/= fetus.

  14. Sean D. Martin says:

    Jay Tea: Macie Morse was born with optic nerve hypoplasia, meaning her optic nerve didn’t develop all the way. The only way to repair it was to grow more of the nerve using umbilical cord stem cells.

    In other words, Jay has his fingers in his ears and won’t listen to all the points being made about stem cell research because he’s got his magic phrase to keep repeating. On the plus side, at least his magic phrase is no longer “ACORN”.

  15. Michael Over Here says:

    I like the implication in Jay Tea’s argument that scientists wouldn’t continue to research other types of non-embryonic stem cells until the wise Bush cut off funding. You’re an idiot if you think that different types of stem cells aren’t good at different types of treatments. The thing that this article demonstrates most effectively is that ALL TYPES stem cells should be researched thoroughly because there are incredible applications. Researching embryonic stem cells may lead to breakthroughs in adult stem cells and vice-versa.

    Only an idiot would see this as a vindication of Bush.

  16. Jay Tea says:

    No, Michael, I would call it “serendipity” or “dumb luck” that – for non-scientific reasons — research into fetal/embryonic stem cells was blocked from proceding with public funding. I don’t think anyone could have foreseen that stem cells from other sources would be so damned productive, while fetal/embryonic ones would be nothing but dead ends.

    But you can’t argue with results — that’s the nature of science. One concrete example trumps a thousand theories. Here is a story about a girl whose sight was restored — some might call that miraculous — through umbilical stem cells, not fetal/embryonic.

    I cannot imagine how life will be like for this girl now. And I hope that American scientists will look at the work that restored her sight and make sure it’s safe enough for use here in the US.

    J.

  17. mambochicken23 says:

    Jay Tea, you have a point. These cells were umbilical cord cells. Cookie goes to you.

    Where you’re wrong, however, is that research into embryonic stem cells is not important simply because there are other types of stem cells that can be used. You cannot claim that Bush’s science policy is what spurred the development of this treatment for this girl. 1) This procedure happened in China. Bush gets no points for Chinese policy. 2) You cannot logically claim, even if this were to have happened in America, that we wouldn’t have reached a similar or better treatment FASTER if Bush hadn’t placed such restrictions on stem cell research. Just because other stem cells can be used does not mean that they are better or preferable.

    Rheinhard is right on the money – Research is what we scientists do when we don’t know what we’re doing. We have our theories, and we have our scientific method to uncover truth in the natural world – but the truth is that we do not know factual information regarding natural phenomena until we conduct the appropriate experimental manipulations. And even then, we need to be able to replicate it. And even then, these conclusions are put under rigorous scrutiny from the scientific community.

    Simply stated, Bush’s stem-cell research restrictions were a hindrance to the scientific process. A roadblock that is completely unnecessary, one which makes scientists’ jobs tough jobs tougher than they needed to be. Embryos are not babies, they are not sentient, they are quite literally balls of mostly-undifferentiated cells that cannot hear, smell, see, think, or recognize pain. These embryos are/were going to be thrown out in the trash. They would be better-used to serve humanity and science.

  18. Michael Over Here says:

    Jay Tea, you know how I know you’re speaking out of your ass on this issue? Because there’s no such thing as a fetal stem cell. It’s a term that’s not used and if it were used it wouldn’t be lassoed with embryonic. Check out the wikipedia page:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell#Fetal

    So fetal stem cells are in the same category as adult stem cells. I don’t know anyone who is in favor of using “fetal stem cells”. It’s ridiculous and it proves that your regurgitating nonsense.

  19. Sean D. Martin says:

    Jay Tea: I don’t think anyone could have foreseen that stem cells from other sources would be so damned productive, while fetal/embryonic ones would be nothing but dead ends.

    But you can’t argue with results — that’s the nature of science.

    Nothing but dead ends? So you’d effectively stop all significant research in an area and then believe you’re making an honest point by declaring research in that area is clearly unproductive.

    Please take your fingers out of your ears long enough to read the excerpt Rheinhard posted. Especially the part that says (paraphrased): You don’t get to hobble the horse and then declare that it can’t win any races!

  20. SaveFarris says:

    Sean, liberals want to stop research after a few tests all the time. SDI, Vouchers, global warming: you name it

  21. mambochicken23 says:

    Congratulations, Farris… That’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever seen you write. Just when it seems you can’t top yourself, you come through with flying colors. Good work.

  22. Zython says:

    Jay, science isn’t a zero-sum game, unlike religion, apparently. The use and understanding of umbilical stem cells was DERIVED from the use and understanding of embryotic ones. Your argument is akin to saying that astronomers would be perfectly capable and encouraged of fully understanding black holes if they were banned from studying average age stars.

  23. ed says:

    Sean, liberals want to stop research after a few tests all the time. SDI, Vouchers, global warming: you name it

    Mm-hm. So SaveFarris, are you pro-stem cell research, or anti?

  24. Jaim says:

    Jay has as much scientific expertise as he does military experience.

    And this is a great story.

  25. Wek says:

    Jeebus. Wingnuts would rather have Macie tapping around with a white cane than being able to see.

  26. Duros62 says:

    And I hope that American scientists will look at the work that restored her sight and make sure it’s safe enough for use here in the US.

    And private insurance companies still won’t cover it.

  27. Franklin says:

    “Jay has as much scientific expertise as he does military experience.”

    Ahaha. Yeah, you should read his mini-novella “Jay Tea’s Silly Navy.” (Pretty sure that was the title)

  28. SaveFarris says:

    ed,

    Pro-, but you’re not asking the question you think you’re asking.

  29. ed says:

    Pro-, but you’re not asking the question you think you’re asking.

    I’m pretty sure I was asking whether or not you’re a typical hypocritical right-wing troll dildo, but your interpretation might be amusing. Have at it.

  30. Sean D. Martin says:

    SaveFarris: Sean, liberals want to stop research after a few tests all the time. SDI, Vouchers, global warming: you name it

    Stem cell research, economic recovery, education reform to name just three.

    Now. You prove it. You made the claim. Back it up. Show me where there has been no research into global warming. Show me where “liberals” have called for an end to research in environmental science, vouchers or anything.

  31. Duros62 says:

    The only thing Farris is right about is SDI. And it isn’t a “few tests”, it’s been almost 30 years with very little to show for it.

  32. ed says:

    it’s been almost 30 years with very little to show for it.

    Well, there’s that pesky budget deficit to show for it. A significant chunk of it at least.

  33. SaveFarris says:

    Show me where

  34. Sean D. Martin says:

    Yes, Farris?

  35. Jay Tea says:

    Ahaha. Yeah, you should read his mini-novella “Jay Tea’s Silly Navy.” (Pretty sure that was the title)

    Gee, Franklin, I’m touched you remember my singular (well, two-part singular) foray into historic fiction. Thanks for reminding me — it was quite well received over in the forum for such fiction where I originally posted it.

    Actually, it was “The Adventures of the USS Flyswatter” and “The Further Adventures of the USS Flyswatter,” that being the unofficial for the entirely-fictional USS Manchester in the first year after Pearl Harbor. Your title, while flattering as it works my own name in there, won’t work — I tried to keep the focus on the story, not the author.

    I am honored that you still remember it, about a year after I finished it.

    J.

  36. [...] Another hive-mind lefty blogger sings the praises of Obama for forcing all Americans to fund embryo destructive research, citing the effectiveness of a stem cell treatment in China to treat a child’s blindness. [...]