Nothing to say, yet
Transcription
Stem cells are specialized cells with the ability to heal and repair tissue. There are two main types: embryonic stem cells and adult stem cells. Embryonic stem cells have the potential to differentiate into any cell in the body, while adult stem cells have more limited capabilities. Stem cell research is controversial due to the use of embryos and umbilical cord tissue. Some countries have banned stem cell treatment, leading people to travel to other countries where it is legal. Stem cell treatment can be expensive and there is limited research on potential side effects. Despite the challenges, stem cells hold great potential for the future of medicine. Hi, we're 8th grade students from High Point Academy. I'm Jimmy. I'm Gavin. I'm Grant. And I'm Aiden. Today, we're going to dive into the recent history and deep controversy of stem cells and what they hold for the future of our medicine. So guys, what are stem cells? Basically, they can be cells that have superpowers to heal the body in ways that are unbelievable. But, by definition, stem cells are specialized, undifferentiated cells found in various places in the body that have helped you grow and even repair tissue. Whoa, so they're like superheroes in a cell. Do different types of stem cells have different powers? Yeah, but you can't talk about stem cells without specifying what type we're going to talk about. So, what are these types? Well, first, there are embryonic stem cells. These are harvested from embryo, which is one of the earliest life forms of a human. They also have the ability to differentiate into all the cells of the adult body, allowing them to heal tissues, muscles, generally holding huge potential for healing the human body, the future of medicine. And the second type? The second type is non-embryonic stem cells, which we'll refer to as adult stem cells. Adult stem cells, which have fewer capabilities, but are still amazingly capable, are found in nearly every tissue and organ of the body. They can differentiate to yield the specialized cell types of that tissue or organ, but cannot differentiate into all of the human body cells. Wow, that's really cool. Yeah, both embryonic and adult stem cells have incredible capabilities that possibly hold the future of medicine and saving lives. Wow, these are pretty awesome. I still have a question, though. How was something like this discovered? I think I have an answer to that question. So, let's start around 60 years ago. Early 1960s, a biologist named Ernest McCullough and a cell biologist, James Edgar Till, experimented with transplanting bone marrow into lethally irradiated mice, which are mice with extreme levels of radiation. They wanted to see the result of injecting the mice with transplanted bone marrow to see if it gave hope to saving the lives of those mice. Yeah, that's interesting, but how did this lead to stem cell discovery? Several weeks later, unique lumps formed on the mice's body. Okay, but that still didn't answer my question. Hold on, I'm getting there. Whatever. Anyways, initially called spleen colonies, these lumps were something that nobody has ever seen. Even more intriguing, these lumps were self-regenerating. This meant that they could heal almost any part of the body by self-regenerating. Ernest and Till were fascinated. They came to the conclusion that these spleen colonies are what we call stem cells today, an undifferentiated cell of a multicellular organism which is capable of giving rise to indefinitely more. Only later were stem cells starting to be used for human medicine, cures, and disease treatment. And only until the 21st century did it start to be used consistently in athletes and people with treatable diseases or medical conditions. These seem perfect. Are there any downsides though? Yeah, there's a big one. As we mentioned earlier, many stem cells are harvested from embryos and babies' umbilical cord. This raises a lot of controversy, as some people view it as killing babies. But isn't an embryo technically not a baby? Well, that's a tricky one. See, you're correct in that technical terms, it isn't. But it is soon to be one, and the knowledge of that is enough to persuade many people to disagree with the research. Due to this controversy, Germany, Italy, Portugal, and Austria banned the treatment. These bans influenced some people to travel to other countries where it was legal to take the treatment. And it was all based on opinion and preference, which raises the question of if lifesaving technology should be limited due to a portion of the population disagreeing with it. Yeah, if it can save lives, why limit the use? Just because it's controversial does not change the fact that it can still save a life. Well, you see, it's a very debated topic. Some don't see it as a way of saving lives, but rather taking an innocent one's life. Yeah, that's right. It all depends on if the knowledge that it will become a human is enough to end a possible future in the medical field. It can be compared to killing a seed for a tree, which some would find very acceptable, as there is time and nurture needed for it to become a developed organism. What are people doing to fight against it if they care so much? Good question. In 1999, over 100 people, led by conservative U.S. Senator Sam Brownback, released a statement against the research, arguing and urging for it to stop. There are also religions that do not agree with it, such as the Orthodox Church. The same people fighting against stem cell research also fought against abortion rights. Many of the anti-abortionists in the Roe v. Wade cases are also against stem cell treatment. Wow, I never knew that this could be so controversial. Up next, an interview with someone who has had a unique experience with stem cells. We are fortunate enough to have a person who has had a stem cell transplant to agree to do an interview with us. This person has asked that we not use their name, and we have only communicated with them via email, so we will be reading their answers. What was the process of choosing your treatment, and why, in the end, were stem cells your choice? I chose stem cells because I kept up with the research and knew that it was my best chance. I was able to get a list of centers in the U.S. through the NIH website. I interviewed and was selected for the Colorado Blood Institute, not as a trial, but as a private patient. Were there any side effects or lasting effects? Lasting effects are that it stops the disease progression, wiped out my immune system through chemo, and rebuilt it through stem cells. Stem cells, because they can come from any part of the body. So far, the lasting effects are that I don't show MRI progression for my disease. Was your treatment a tedious or even painful experience, or was it quick and easy? The treatment was tedious. I did it safely over three months and was in the hospital for about two weeks while I had them extracted from my bone marrow and had them frozen and received when my reviewed blood counts were back up. Looking back on this experience, was the treatment worth it? Looking back, yes, it was worth it. I am only sorry I waited so long to do it. My insurance at the time covered all the costs. So yes, I am glad I did it safely in the U.S. But no, it was because I thought it's incredibly hard to get. I do hope we'll see more of it in the future. But what does all this mean? Why should I, a regular citizen, care about stem cells? Well, as proven, stem cells are superheroes themselves. They can save lives. What do they hold for the future, though? Well, they are currently being used in various applications, ranging from therapy to help athletes and people with trauma recover from treating chronic illnesses and serving as an insanely accurate testing specimen. However, there are many restrictions that limit the use of these stem cells. Stem cell treatment can cost thousands of dollars and in some cases nearly $100,000, making money a burden that restricts stem cell usage. They are also extremely recent and have very little research being done on them. What do you mean by that? We do not know about possible side effects because of how little time doctors and scientists have had to study them. And success is not guaranteed from therapy or transplant. Sadly, the future of stem cells holds great potential, but implementing them and using them is challenging. The cost of the actual treatment, appointments, dodging restrictions, and harvesting the actual stem cells stack up tremendously. So stem cells are really only offered to people with wealthy economic standing. This cuts the range of people who can be saved with stem cells down to a smaller percentage of the population. So how realistic is it that the upcoming couple of decades will start seeing stem cells used regularly in chronic illness and injuries? In order for stem cells to be used in medical treatment in the future, we would need to overcome a lot of burdens, even if we can start making them somewhat in the norm. So my ultimate question is, are stem cells really worth all the risks, costs, and trouble to have a chance to be cured? I don't think we have the authority to choose which one the people want. Let's let the audience decide for themselves.
