Stem cells, Fetal

Last week, a California biotech company announced that its human stem cells restored memory in rodents bred to have an Alzheimer's-like condition—the first evidence that human neural stem cells can improve memory.

The company, called StemCells, is betting that its proprietary preparation of stem cells from fetal brain tissue will take on many different roles in the central nervous system. The company and its collaborators have already shown that its stem-cell product has potential in protecting vision in diseased eyes, acting as brain support cells, or improving walking ability in rodents with spinal cord injury....

His company is not the only group bringing stem cells into the clinic. While much attention was paid to Geron's departure from the world's first embryonic stem cell trial (see "Geron Shuts Down Pioneering Stem-Cell Program"), many other groups have continued to push their non-embryonic stem-cell therapies forward for leukemia, colitis, stroke, and more. Meanwhile, Advanced Cell Technology continues its U.K.-based embryonic stem-cell therapy trials for blindness. Non-embryonic stem cells can come from a variety of sources—bone marrow, blood, as well as donated aborted fetal tissue, as is the case with StemCells and Neuralstem, another company focused on neuronal stem cells. In recent years, scientists have also developed methods for turning normal adult cells into stem cells (so-called induced pluripotent stem cells), but their safety has yet to be tested in humans.

So while StemCells is not a lone wolf, it may well be a pack leader. [Emphasis mine.]

Medical experts and investigators are pondering the origins of more than 200 human fetuses found disposed in the Urals. Speculation ranges from illegal abortions to illegal stem-cell research.

The discovery of 248 human fetuses near the town of Nevyansk in the Urals sent waves through the medical community in Russia, raising questions as to why and how the fetuses, aged 12-16 weeks, ended up in the forest near a highway.

Officials already believe the fetuses are from at least four different medical institutions. Some of them may be more than a decade old.

All the fetuses are now undergoing forensic examination at a local hospital in an attempt to discover more details which may shed light on the case.

Police officials say negligence on behalf of company which provided disposal of biological waste for several hospitals in the region is most likely responsible for the incident. They add right now none of the medical institutions are under suspicion for questionable activity.

However, before any definite ruling is made by investigators, many in the medical field propose their own version of events.

The head of the State Duma committee on Family, Women and Children, Elena Mizulina, believes the fetuses were intended for pharmacological and cosmetological purposes.

“It’s possible there was some kind of medical or law enforcement inspection coming up, so someone wanted to get rid of incriminating evidence,” she said in an interview to newspaper Izvestia.

Mizulina said fetuses at this stage of development are especially valued by pharmacologists and cosmetologists since they present a great source of stem cells. “The demand for such “material” is huge.”

Some believe the fetuses were “leftovers” of a negligent experiment: “I wouldn’t be surprised if at the end it turned out that someone was gathering research material for a dissertation, and then just threw it away in this manner,” said an unidentified doctor in an interview to Gazeta.ru.

Gynecologist Yuliana Abaeva also believes the fetuses may have been intended to serve as the source of vaccines: “It could be an unused abortive material for vaccines or fetal therapy, which is a cell therapy, extremely popular in cosmetology,” she said in an interview to Russian News Service.

Pertussis infections have reached epidemic proportions in the state of Washington, officials there said, with more than 10 times as many cases this year as were counted by early May in 2011.

The state's health department has recorded 1,284 cases of pertussis, familiarly known as whooping cough, through May 5. Last year, 128 cases were reported through the first 18 weeks.

In six of the past eight weeks, more than 100 cases were reported. Although there were only 54 in the week ending May 5, the health department noted that additional cases may have occurred that had not been reported to the department.

By far, the highest infection rates have been in children and teens. Infants younger than 12 months and children 10 to 13 years old have had rates approaching 1 per 1,000.

Among the 86 infants infected, 23 were hospitalized. Most of those admissions were in infants younger than 3 months.

Diphtheria, Tetanus, and Pertussis Vaccines

There are several formulations of vaccines used to prevent diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis. Some are combined with vaccines to prevent other diseases and reduce the total number of shots that someone receives at one office visit. In the U.S., DTaP, Tdap, and Td vaccines are most commonly used. One of these (DTaP) is given to children younger than 7 years of age, and two (Tdap and Td) are given to older children and adults.

Children should get 5 doses of DTaP, one dose at each of the following ages: 2, 4, 6, and 15-18 months and 4-6 years.

Td is a tetanus-diphtheria vaccine given to adolescents and adults as a booster shot every 10 years, or after an exposure to tetanus under some circumstances. Tdap is similar to Td but also containing protection against pertussis. Adolescents 11-18 years of age (preferably at age 11-12 years) and adults 19 through 64 years of age should receive a single dose of Tdap. For adults 65 and older who have close contact with an infant and have not previously received Tdap, one dose should be received. Tdap should also be given to 7-10 year olds who are not fully immunized against pertussis. Tdap can be given no matter when Td was last received.

If you are depressed, or schizophrenic or have Alzheimer's, scientists say you probably have a shrunken hippocampus. The good news: a drug that just entered human trials promises to re-grow that part of the brain.

It's an entirely new approach to treating clinical depression, which is the first of several diseases scientists at biotech company Neuralstem are hoping to address with their experimental oral drug. Most antidepressants work on brain chemistry, tweaking levels of neurotransmitters including serotonin, norepinephrine, and dopamine. This is the first drug that aims to re-grow patients' atrophied brains.

Dr. Karl Johe, Neuralstem's CEO, believes that depression is a three-headed beast that affects neurotransmitter levels, neurons, and hippocampus size. And he says their new drug could address all three. He also hopes the drug will reverse the disease to the point that patients could permanently go off the drug.

"If we can show by MRI that we've increased hippocampus volume and at the same time reversed depression symptoms for six months after patients have stopped taking the drug, then we'll have a cure."

They discovered this drug by testing several on Neuralstem's neural stem cell line and seeing which promoted cell growth.  Then they tested the most promising one in animals and now NSI-189 is being tested in humans for effectiveness at treating depression.

Anyone who has ever suffered with depression, or know someone who has, is cheering.  Depression is devastating and debilitating and curing it would be a great achievement.  But that is not what caught my eye.  It is that this drug was tested with Neuralstem's cell line.  A cell line that, with a little digging, looks to have come from an aborted fetus.  From a Bloomberg press release:

The researchers used a line of neural stem cells developed by Neuralstem Inc., a closely held biotechnology company based in Rockville, Maryland. The company developed the line from fetal tissue donated by a woman who underwent an elective abortion at 8 weeks.

The stem cells, taken from an area near the developing spinal cord of the fetus, have the theoretical ability to develop or differentiate into any of three cell types found in the nervous system. The cells were kept alive in culture and chemically manipulated to keep them from differentiating.

I have written before about ReNeuron, a UK company that is built around the neural stem cells taken from an aborted fetus.  ReNeuron has gotten approval to begin a trial treating stroke patients with these stem cells.  Once again the financial sector has the story and the true source of the stem cells, which is usually absent in mainstream media reports.  From the Financial Times:

ReNeuron has overcome the final regulatory barrier to treating stroke patients with stem cells.

The UK Gene Therapy Advisory Committee granted its approval for the Guildford-based company to begin a clinical trial with a dozen stroke patients in Scotland. It will be the world’s first human test of stem cell therapy for strokes.

John Sinden, ReNeuron chief scientist, told the FT the two-year trial would begin in the second quarter of 2010, led by Keith Muir, a neurologist at Glasgow University. Extensive animal tests have shown neural stem cells – derived from cells that originated several years ago in an aborted human foetus – could help a damaged brain to regenerate, potentially relieving some symptoms of strokes.

The FDA put ReNeuron's application for clinical trials in the United States on hold in 2007.

In all of the controversy over embryonic stem cells, fetal stem cells are often overlooked.  What are fetal stem cells?  Fetal stem cells some from a fetus anywhere from 8 weeks to 20 weeks gestation.  The most common source of fetal stem cells are from aborted fetuses.  The use of fetal stem cells in research is often presented as totally uncontroversial.  The reason is because fetal stem cells are often called adult stem cells simply because they do not come from embryos. 

Do not be fooled.  Fetal stem cells are donated by a woman after an elective abortion.  In other words, to get fetal stem cells, a fetus must die.  This article about the direct injection of fetal stem cells into the spinal cord of a patient with ALS, better known as Lou Gehrig's disease, is a perfect example of how the media often gloss over this fact:

For the first time in the United States, stem cells have been directly injected into the spinal cord of a patient, researchers announced Thursday.

Doctors injected stem cells from 8-week-old fetal tissue into the spine of a man in his early 60s who has advanced ALS, or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. It was part of a clinical trial designed to determine whether it is safe to inject stem cells into the spinal cord and whether the cells themselves are safe.

ALS is a fatal neurodegenerative disease that causes the deterioration of specific nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord called motor neurons, which control muscle movement. About 30,000 Americans have ALS at any given time, according to the ALS Association.

The company that has received FDA approval for this trial is Neuralstem Inc.  Their website does not announce where they got their fetal stem cells.  They could have gotten them from a miscarriage which would have been an ethical source.  The above article also does not mention where the fetal stem cells came from.  But a short search brought me to the answer.  This press release (taken from Bloomberg.com) clearly states where Neuralstem Inc. got its fetal neural stem cells:

Neuralstem Inc.

The researchers used a line of neural stem cells developed by Neuralstem Inc., a closely held biotechnology company based in Rockville, Maryland. The company developed the line from fetal tissue donated by a woman who underwent an elective abortion at 8 weeks.

The stem cells, taken from an area near the developing spinal cord of the fetus, have the theoretical ability to develop or differentiate into any of three cell types found in the nervous system. The cells were kept alive in culture and chemically manipulated to keep them from differentiating.

Of course the original article about the ALS trial never mentions that the fetal stem cells came from a fetus ripped out of its mother's womb:

These particular stem cells -- which came from the spinal cord of an 8-week-old fetus -- are neural stem cells, which have the ability to turn into different types of nerve cells. These are not the same stem cells as the controversial human embryonic stem cells, which destroy the embryo when the stem cells are removed.

It is implied that because these cells do not come from embryos, they are non-controversial.  I suppose if you fail to mention that these cells came from an aborted fetus, they fail to stir up controversy.  Convenient.

The source of the stem cells is not the only reason to be concerned about this trial.  A year ago, it was announced that a boy injected with fetal stem cells developed a brain tumor.  From the AP:

A family desperate to save a child from a lethal brain disease sought highly experimental injections of fetal stem cells—injections that triggered tumors in the boy's brain and spinal cord, Israeli scientists reported Tuesday....

The unidentified Israeli boy has a rare, fatal genetic disease with a tongue-twisting name—ataxia telangiectasia, or A-T. Degeneration of a certain brain region gradually robs these children of movement. Plus, a faulty immune system leads to frequent infections and cancers. Most die in their teens or early 20s.

Israeli doctors pieced together the child's history: When he was 9, the family traveled to Russia, to a Moscow clinic that provided injections of neural stem cells from fetuses—immature cells destined to grow into a main type of brain cells. The cells were injected into his brain and spinal cord twice more, at ages 10 and 12.

Back home in Israel at age 13, the boy's A-T was severe enough to require that he use a wheelchair when he also began complaining of headaches. Tests at Sheba Medical Center in Tel Aviv uncovered a growth pushing on his brain stem and a second on his spinal cord. Surgeons removed the spinal cord mass when the boy was 14, in 2006 and they say his general condition has remained stable since then.

Many people often argue that using fetal stem cells from an aborted fetus is morally acceptable because the fetus was going to die anyway.  The Catholic Church rejects this argument.  If an organism must be intentionally destroyed to harvest cells, then the cells are morally tainted.  If these fetal stem cells had come from a natural miscarriage, then it would be morally permissible, even laudable, for parents to donate these cells to research.  The morality of fetal stem cell use is analogous to that of organ donation.  If the patient died of natural causes or a traumatic event, then is is morally permissible to use their organs for the benefit of others.  It is not morally permissible to intentionally and prematurely end a person's life and then take their organs for donation.  Using fetal stem cells from aborted fetuses is analogous to using organs from death row inmates or victims of euthanasia.

This ALS trial is one to watch.  I pray that researchers come up with a better and safer way to treat ALS than the use of fetal stem cells.

I am beginning to love William Saletan.  I know...I know, he is pro-choice.  But I cannot help but like people who are intellectually honest and can see the writing on the wall.

I have said that we abandon the embryo at our own peril.  Which means if we allow the embryo, a member of the human species, to be gutted for harvestable biological material, then all of a sudden other members of our species begin to look like that as well.  The "they are going to die anyway" argument is particularly insidious because it sounds so reasonable.  But the slippery slope is treacherous.  Death row inmates are going to die anyway, why not put their organs to good use like the Chinese?  What about those in a persistent vegetative state?  Why not use the organs from aborted fetuses?  They are going to die anyway right?  That is the suggestion of a stem cell scientist in Britain.

William Saletan sees.  His post Drill Babies, Drill: If harvesting embryos is OK, how about fetuses? is spot on.  He notes:

Two arguments have persuaded the United States to fund stem-cell research using destroyed embryos. One is that the research will save lives. The other is that the embryos, left over from fertility treatments, will otherwise be wasted.

Then quotes:

Professor Stuart Campbell, who has argued for the abortion time limit to be lowered, had no ethical objections to the proposal. He said many babies were aborted quite late, "and if they are going to be terminated, it is a shame to waste their organs."

Do I think it is any coincidence that some lawmakers are suggesting commuting sentences for prisoners who consent to be live organ donors?  Or that the AMA wants to look at paying people for their organs?  Or that it is being proposed that your organ donor sticker on your driver's license supersede any other advanced medical directive or instructions you may have in place?

We are all going to "die anyway."  Are your organs being wasted in your body?  Or do you still think this is just about "left-over" embryos?

A family desperate to save a child from a lethal brain disease sought highly experimental injections of fetal stem cells—injections that triggered tumors in the boy's brain and spinal cord, Israeli scientists reported Tuesday....

The unidentified Israeli boy has a rare, fatal genetic disease with a tongue-twisting name—ataxia telangiectasia, or A-T. Degeneration of a certain brain region gradually robs these children of movement. Plus, a faulty immune system leads to frequent infections and cancers. Most die in their teens or early 20s.

Israeli doctors pieced together the child's history: When he was 9, the family traveled to Russia, to a Moscow clinic that provided injections of neural stem cells from fetuses—immature cells destined to grow into a main type of brain cells. The cells were injected into his brain and spinal cord twice more, at ages 10 and 12.

Back home in Israel at age 13, the boy's A-T was severe enough to require that he use a wheelchair when he also began complaining of headaches. Tests at Sheba Medical Center in Tel Aviv uncovered a growth pushing on his brain stem and a second on his spinal cord. Surgeons removed the spinal cord mass when the boy was 14, in 2006 and they say his general condition has remained stable since then.

These stem cell were fetal stem cells.  Yes that is right, stem cells taken from fetuses that were likely victims of elective abortion.  Some researchers have said that stem cells from late-term abortions are the best.  If fetal stem cells can cause uncontrolled growth, then there are major concerns about Geron's upcoming human trial with embryonic stem cells.  Wesley J. Smith voiced my concerns perfectly:

Which brings us to the Geron license from the FDA. Geron's work with its product has been exclusively with mice, which were not kept alive nearly the four years it took for this patient to develop stem cell-caused tumors. This raises a question of whether, in light of this report, the FDA should revisit its go ahead to Geron to use ES cell-derived cells in human beings,particularly since it might take years to learn whether the product causes tumors.

And while we are on the subject, it is important that the patient-subject consent forms that will be used in these experiments--which have not yet been made public--be carefully reviewed. The paralyzed patients who will participate in Geron's safety trials are full ambulatory at this moment. But these unknown persons will be seriously injured sometime soon. Within a week or two of their injuries, facing potential paralysis from spinal cord injury, they will be approached by Geron to be test subjects, since the product designed for acute cases, not people with long-term paralysis. This will be a very emotional time in which these patients will be in deep emotional distress at the prospect of never walking again. In such an urgent crisis situation, it will be particularly important that all participants be made unequivocally aware of the potential risks, that these adverse events might take years to develop, and indeed, that being the subjects of such potentially risky experiments, that they might have to be monitored for the rest of their lives.

This boy's family was desperate to find him a cure and had him injected with stem cells from fetuses and years later there are serious consequences.  Somewhere out there today are 10 people who will be desperate to walk again.  If they join this trial there maybe lifelong consequences for them as well.  I truly pray for them and their families.

I have written before about how I believe that the real story isn't about embryonic stem cells, but fetal stem cells. Fetal stem cells come from spontaneous or induced abortions. Yes, that is right, stem cells from 10 to 20 week old fetuses. There is a very slippery slope between creating embryos and extracting embryonic stem cells in a dish, and implanting those embryos into female volunteers, letting the embryos grow into fetuses and aborting them to harvest fetal stem cells that are as versatile as embryonic stem cells, but not nearly as unstable (meaning that they do not cause tumors.)

Some people may think I am crazy to think this "destroying human life to harvest stem cells" trend will go that far. Unfortunately, it probably already has gone this far and possibly farther. It is time to see the writing on the wall.

Wesley J. Smith has read between the lines and has a great entry on monkey fetal farming:

I have long asserted that conducting ESCR and human cloning research is not intended, nor will it long remain, in the Petri dish. Rather, the real game is implantation and gestation into the late embryo and fetal stages, which would better permit disease studies, research into
genetic engineering, organ harvesting, etc.

Primate cloning is the precursor to learning how to do human cloning. Now, a paper (Human Reproduction Vol.22, No.8 pp. 2232*2242, 2007) published in a professional journal (no link), shows scientists indeed want to conduct fetal farming in monkey models:

The availability of reliable, efficient methods for producing viable SCNT embryos in the monkey should support the derivation, characterization and transplantation of autologous, immunocompatible ESCs in efforts to restore form and function to damaged tissues in a preclinical model. However, our goal of producing neurodegenerative disease models in the monkey from gene targeted donor cells will require pregnancy establishment following SCNT embryo transfer into synchronized recipients.

When human fetal farming begins--assuming it can be technologically--don't say you weren't warned.

"Hope for Daniel" is a piece by the Mercury News about a boy names Daniel who is being treated for Batten disease with "adult stem cells."  Unfortunately, Batten disease is fatal.

I think I have yet to see a piece so fraught with contradictions.  On one hand, it portrays advances in adult stem cells in a very favorable light and points out the bad rap adult stem cell research gets.  On the other hand, it includes stem cells from aborted babies under the "adult stem cell" umbrella.

Let us start with the positive aspects.  Here are some great quotes about adult stem cell research:

A New England Journal of Medicine editorial in September dismissed such adult stem-cell claims as "pure hokum.'' And in July, a letter published by three scientists in the journal Science complained that inflated assertions about adult stem cells "mislead lay people and cruelly deceive patients.''

Yet others contend the potential of adult stem cells is underappreciated.

``If people could just focus on the data and the science, I think we'd all be better off,'' said Martin McGlynn, chief executive officer of StemCells, the Palo Alto company that developed Daniel's treatment. McGlynn says he wishes the discussion about adult and embryonic cells was less politicized....

...some scientists, including Stewart Sell, editor in chief of the journal Stem Cell Reviews, contend adult stem cells often don't get the recognition they deserve, in part because of the politics surrounding them.

``There are many in the field, including myself, who don't understand why some groups of scientists feel they have to disrespect adult stem-cell research in order to push embryonic stem-cell research,'' said Sell, who supports studies of both types of cells.

Here is where I have trouble.  Fetal stem cells come from fetuses, usually after 10 week gestation.  They can come from miscarriage or election abortion.  So, in the archaic definition of "adult stem cells" as stem cells from sources other than an embryo, technically fetal stem cells are adult stem cells.  As the Mercury News article points out, Daniel has been treated with stem cells from abortions:

On Nov. 14, the boy became the first person to have his brain injected with nerve stem cells derived from fetal tissue. The cells are technically considered adult stem cells because they are found in body organs and specialized tissue that has matured past the embryo stage.

Adult cell in 10-12 weeks

While embryonic stem cells can produce every tissue in the body, adult stem cells -- which often appear in the body about 10 to 12 weeks after conception -- can usually produce only a limited variety of tissue types.

Some abortion opponents object to Daniel's procedure because the cells he received came from women who had abortions, miscarriages or stillbirths. Nonetheless, because the cells are adult stem cells, they aren't subject to federal restrictions on human embryonic stem cells.

Clearly, the problem is that many of us that object to destroying embryos to get at their stem cells would also object to using abort babies as harvestable biological material.  By clumping fetal stem cells with adult stem cells, most of us will no doubt be deceived.

The Catholic Church would only condone the use of fetal stem cells if they came from a miscarriage and donated with consent by the parents, much like in the organ donation of a deceased child.

Daniel is improving with the fetal stem cell treatment:

Before the operation, Daniel could barely speak or walk. Now, three months later, they say he is talking, eating ravenously and fast gaining strength.

``It's a miracle, what's happening to this little boy,'' said Daniel's father, Marcus Kerner, who is heartened by the many people who have said they are praying for his son. ``We have hope and faith that these children are going to make it.''

I fear there is a market for aborted babies, and not just for eggs either.  I have said many times that fetal stem cells are valuable, not only because they are more stable than embryonic stem cells, which means they don't cause tumor formation, but because they are already differentiated into the cell type of choice.

I am particularly disturbed by the following sentiment from Daniel's parents:

That troubles Daniel Kerner's parents. They say they don't care whether a treatment is from adult stem cells or the embryonic kind. If it has the slightest possibility of helping a child with an otherwise incurable disease, they maintain, it should be tried. 

I pray for Daniel and sympathize with his parents, but I certainly do not agree that anything goes if it has the "slightest possibility of helping a child." 

The moral of this story: read carefully.  Just because the article says adult stem cells doesn't necessarily mean that they come from an ethical source.

I pray with every ounce of my being that this is not true.  From the BBC:

Ukraine babies in stem cell probe 
By Matthew Hill
BBC Health Correspondent  

 
There is heated debate about the ethics of using stem cells.  Healthy new-born babies may have been killed in Ukraine to feed a flourishing international trade in stem cells, evidence obtained by the BBC suggests.

Disturbing video footage of post-mortem examinations on dismembered tiny bodies raises serious questions about what happened to them.

Ukraine has become the self-styled stem cell capital of the world.

There is a trade in stem cells from aborted foetuses, amid unproven claims they can help fight many diseases.

But now there are claims that stem cells are also being harvested from live babies.

Wall of silence

The BBC has spoken to mothers from the city of Kharkiv who say they gave birth to healthy babies, only to have them taken by maternity staff.

In 2003 the authorities agreed to exhume around 30 bodies of foetuses and full-term babies from a cemetery used by maternity hospital number six.

One campaigner was allowed into the autopsy to gather video evidence. She has given that footage to the BBC and Council of Europe.

In its report, the Council describes a general culture of trafficking of children snatched at birth, and a wall of silence from hospital staff upwards over their fate.

The pictures show organs, including brains, have been stripped - and some bodies dismembered.

A senior British forensic pathologist says he is very concerned to see bodies in pieces - as that is not standard post-mortem practice.

It could possibly be a result of harvesting stem cells from bone marrow.

Hospital number six denies the allegations.

 
Considering the fact that fetal stem cells are more stable than embryonic stem cells (which means less likely to cause tumors) and some researchers want fetal stem cells from late term abortions for their research, this is not so far fetched.  I will keep an eye on this story and see what develops.

Hat Tip:  Wesley J. Smith

I am so disappointed.  Millipore is teaming with ReNeuron.  From Hemscott.com:

ReNeuron, Millipore launch ReNcell neural stem cell lines under multi-year deal

LONDON (AFX) - UK-based adult stem cell therapy company ReNeuron Group PLC announced the market launch of its patented ReNcell neural stem cell lines for non-therapeutic applications under a multi-year agreement with a biopharmaceutical manufacturing company Millipore Corporation.

The company said it will receive royalty payments on cell line and media sales made by Millipore, which will exclusively manufacture and supply ReNcell.

ReNeuron said the ReNcell lines have been generated for application as models for regenerative medicine. The cell lines are particularly useful in drug discovery applications, where the development of these pathways can be monitored during drug screening, it added.

Why am I disappointed?  First because, ReNeuron uses aborted fetuses as a source of neural stem cells. From ReNeuron's website:

ReNeuron has built its technology platform around human somatic stem cells derived from the fetus, which we believe offer the most viable route to the clinic for stem cell therapy. The principal factors supporting this somatic stem cell approach can be characterised as follows:

Multipotency: somatic stem cells are able to differentiate into the specific cell types found in the organ from which they originated, removing the need for the cell manipulation or sorting when using hES cells
Quality: somatic stem cells from the fetus are free from adventitious virus contamination
Safety: somatic stem cells can be controlled more readily than hES cells once implanted, removing the possible risk of tumours

From an interview with ReNeuron Managing Director Martin Edwards (Thanks Steven!):

D&MD: There has been a lot of fuss over the issue of what happens with fetal remains at Alder Hey Hospital in Liverpool. How does ReNeuron view this in relation to its use of fetal brain cells?

Edwards: We access human fetal brain material from terminated pregnancies. They’re typically about eight-to-ten-week fetuses.

Second, because I use Millipore products everyday in my lab.  While I am sure I couldn't replace everything from Millipore in my lab, I think it might be time to look for some alternate vendors.

All of the fervor over embryonic stem cells often overlooks the procurement of the more desirable pluripotent stem cell, the ones from fetuses.  Now, it is possible to get fetal stem cells from miscarriage which would be ethical.  But most likely, fetal stem cells come from aborted fetuses. 

And while embryonic stem cells that are procured by destryoing embryos are not available for federal funding in the United States, there is no such restriction for research on stem cells from fetuses.

And there is money to be made off the little bodies of aborted babies.  From MSN Money:

Dr. James H. Kelly, Chief Executive Officer of Stem Cell Innovations, Inc. SCLL, presented data yesterday at the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Germ Cell meeting describing further characterization of PluriCells(TM), the Company's pluripotent human stem cell lines. Because these cells are derived from fetal tissue, not early embryos, they are eligible for use in laboratories funded by the National Institutes of Health.

In his presentation, Dr. Kelly described biochemical characteristics of the cells that establish their similarity to human embryonic stem cells, human embryonic germ cells and human primordial germ cells. He also described the ability of the cells to become cells associated with the placenta, a further demonstration of their ability to become multiple cell types.

PluriCells(TM) are a pluripotent stem cell isolated from fetal tissue that have the ability to become all cell types of the body. Because they are developed from fetal germ cells, not viable embryos, they are eligible to be used in any NIH funded laboratory. Stem cells derived from fetal germ cells were explicitly excluded from the Presidential ban by the Department of Health and Human Services guidance document of March 19, 2002, that laid out what type of stem cells could and could not be used in Federally funded research (for the actual document see: http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/stemcell.pdf).

Hat tip:  Bioethics.com

From an excellent discussion of the ethics of embryonic stem cell research at Vision.org:

I love Faithmouse.  I can honestly say that I look forward to reading Dan Lacey's blog everyday.  I have never posted a Faithmouse cartoon before because they usually do not pertain to biotechnology.  But, as today is a day for firsts, here is Lacey's cartoon depicting the recent practice of using stem cells from aborted babies for beauty treatments. (The aborted baby part starts half-way through the article.)

I have been reading more and more about fetal stem cells lately.  Here is an example from Genetic Engineering News: 

Stem cells are cells that can produce additional stem cells as well as one or more other types of cells. Pluripotent stem cells can develop into most, if not all, of the tissues of the organism. To date, two types of mammalian stem cells have been shown to be truly pluripotent: the well-known embryonic stem cells (ES cells), which are cultured from very early embryos and are patented by the University of Wisconsin, and the lesser-known embryonic germ cells (EG cells), which are developed from fetal gonadal tissue.

Often fetal stem cells are presented as an acceptable alternative to embryonic stem cells (ES), and also available for federal funding:

While the widespread use of ES cells has been hampered by ethical issues and government funding limitations, Congressional legislation treats fetal tissue differently. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has stated that research involving the derivation and use of EG cells may be conducted with Federal support.

Also from a Fox News story about a clinical trial in Oregon using fetal stem cells to treat Batten disease in children:

Researchers note the cells are taken from fetal tissue — not from developing embryos.

Not surprisingly, most stories on fetal stem cells fail to mention where the fetal tissue comes from.  So what exactly are fetal stem cells and where do they come from?  Well, read here and here and then come back and I will comment.

(I am so impressed with the Dept. of Molecular Biology at Princeton who did the above web pages as well as a great tutorial on SCNT because they haven't succumbed to the political pressure to use deceptive euphemisms instead of the scientifically correct terminology.  Let's see if they stay that way!)

Now that we know how researchers obtain fetal stem cells (in case you missed it or are "click-challenged", fetal stem cells usually come from aborted babies), why are researchers looking at them as a source of pluripotent stem cells?   From William Saletan's Organ Factory:

A UK company called ReNeuron is using fetal stem cells which they hope will treat diseases like Parkinsons, Huntingtons and diabetes.  They explain why they have chosen to use fetal stem cells:

Early human embryonic stem cells (or 'hES' cells) are capable of forming cells from any tissues. However, the cells are likely to form tumours when transplanted.

As the tissues develop through the fetal and adult stages, the resident stem cell populations have a progressively diminished developmental potential and lose their inherent tumour- forming capacity, becoming somatic stem cells, also known as lineage- or tissue-restricted stem cells. Somatic stem cells are therefore likely to be the safest type for use in cell therapy treatments.

ReNeuron has built its technology platform around human somatic stem cells derived from the fetus, which we believe offer the most viable route to the clinic for stem cell therapy.

See the lovely diagram from their website?  I think some thing may be missing.  Could it be the aborted fetus from which they extracted their tissue.  Of course ReNeuron does not mention where they get their fetal tissue and I don't want to accuse them of anything without proof, so I have writtten them to ask where they get their fetal tissue.  Let's see what they say...