As Firm Ends Embryonic Stem Cell Efforts, Reuters Notes Adult Cell Results; AP Totally Fails
Give Ben Hirschler and Kate Kelland at Reuters credit for a fair presentation this morning of the relative progress made in adult stem cell research compared to that achieved thus far in the embryonic arena. Maybe it was because they were reporting from London, where the constraints of insufferable political advocacy in journalism seem (sad to say) less present than they are in the U.S. Meanwhile, Health Writer Matthew Perrone at the Associated Press couldn't even bring himself to recognize the existence of adult stem cells in his Monday afternoon report, and in the process wrote a flat-out fib about the number of FDA-approved stem cell clinical trials taking place.
The occasion for coverage was Geron Corp.'s decision to halt the first government-approved clinical trial involving embryonic stem cells. What follows after the jump are the first six paragraphs from the Reuters analysis:
Story Continues Below Ad ↓A decision by one of the biggest names in stem cell research to throw in the towel will not stop other pioneering work that could yet produce cures for blindness and help mend broken hearts.
Scientists were shocked by U.S. biotech company Geron Corp's decision on Monday to quit embryonic stem cell research -- a move it blamed on a lack of money and the complexities of getting regulatory approval.
Yet, at the same time, teams working with adult stem cells -- a less ambitious area -- are making good progress.
"This is not the end of an era," said Dusko Ilic, senior lecturer in stem cell science at King's College London.
Shortly before Geron told the world it was ending further development of its embryonic stem cell projects, Australia's Mesoblast Ltd reported its adult stem treatment slashed the rate of further heart problems in heart failure patients.
"It's a tale of two ends of the market. I believe the adult stem cell space was always more attractive anyway," said Navid Malik, a biotechnology analyst at Merchant Securities.
Perrone at the Associated Press failed to even recognize the existence of adult stem cell research, let alone the progress made in that arena, and acted as if nothing meaningful will ever be accomplished unless it occurs through the use of embryonic cells. Perrone's fib is in the second-last excerpted paragraph below:
Geron Corp. is exiting the field it pioneered in a calculated business move that underscores the long, costly path embryonic stem cells face to become real-world products.
Late Monday, the company said it would halt its study of a stem cell-based treatment for spinal cord injury, the first embryonic stem cell trial approved in the U.S.
Geron's withdrawal leaves a handful of U.S. companies pursuing medicines using embryonic stem cells, which are capable of morphing into any of the more than 220 cell types in the human body. Scientists hope that one day stem cells might be used to replace or repair damaged tissue from ailments such as heart disease, Parkinson's and stroke.
... Experts say Geron's departure is more a symbolic setback than a real one, since the vast majority of work in the field will continue to be funded by government and academic institutions.
Geron said it still believes in the potential of stem cells and the company is seeking a partner or buyer for its stem cells division.
Despite the promise, the payoff from stem cell research was too far off for Geron. It has no products on the market and would have spent $25 million per year to continue its stem cell program.... Last year Geron launched the first U.S. study of a stem cell treatment in humans: an injection of 2 million stem cells designed to repair spinal cord injury.
But late Monday, the company said the high costs and commercial uncertainties of stem cell research forced it to close the study and instead focus on the more lucrative, predictable market for cancer therapies.
Geron's study may have been the first embryonic study, but a quick search through the Adult Stem Cell Research Network website indicates that there are at least five studies involving adult stem cells which are FDA approved (here, here, here, here, and here). There are probably very many more; I just went to one source to show easy it was to disprove Perrone's ridiculous claim.
One doesn't want to lobby a charge that a news organization appears to be deliberately favoring life-taking research over that which passes ethical muster for purely political reasons. But what else explains the grim determination by the self-described Essential Global News Network to wish away adult stem cell research and fail to acknowledge its accomplishments?
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
- Tom Blumer's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
Embryonic stem cell research is a financial black hole
Submitted by big.league.slider on Tue, 11/15/2011 - 11:06pm.
In 2004, clueless California voters approved prop. 71, which borrowed $3 billion for stem cell research. The $3 billion is spent, and there is not one single significant advancement in stem cell medicine that resulted from that spending. California taxpayers are now left with $6 billion in bond debt as a result.
Just ask...
Submitted by okiehawk44 on Wed, 11/16/2011 - 12:03pm.
Michael J Fox lives in California and lobbied hard for "embryonic" stem cell research over all other more proven stem cell advancements -- he's rich let him pay for this $6 billion boondoggle.
The horror of "research" on
Submitted by celator on Tue, 11/15/2011 - 11:35pm.
The horror of "research" on embryonic and fetal cells wanders off into unimaginable areas of depravity. Good for Geron for abandoning this evil.
However, there is bad news in the research and application area of cell research. Pepsico uses fetal cells (from the kidneys), via a contracted firm called Senomyx, to conduct research using aborted babies to create flavor enhancers for their Pepsi drink. And they defend that practice as though it were a good business practice. I've had my last Pepsi.
http://www.lifenews.com/2011/05/30/pepsi-ignores-criticism-on-use-of-abo...
Stem cells are still only a theory.
Submitted by drsamherman on Tue, 11/15/2011 - 11:46pm.
The few applied clinical trials completed on stem cell replacement therapy have not reached the level of proof dictated by the Food and Drug Administration for their use in regular human therapy in any disease state. Experimentally, they have produced some interesting results, but I emphasize again the stem cell research has NOT yielded the level of evidence required for FDA approval.
Yes, FDA has approved some questionable therapies which have proven to be riskier than thought at the time of approval, but the bar for that agency's approval remains extremely high for a very good reason. The FDA's primary mission in health care is the approval of only those therapies which are proven to be both safe AND effective in defined disease states and with standards for clinical trials which follow generally accepted clinical and scientific proof of same.
The hyperbole over stem cells is unwarranted until more proof of efficacy is provided through published clinical trials in peer-reviewed journals and FDA approval for therapeutic use is obtained. Outside of that, stem cell therapy for any disease state remains experimental for the precise reason that no such proof or approval exists.
Dr. Sam
Submitted by GW on Wed, 11/16/2011 - 10:29am.
Are you talking about all stem cell research? Is there a distinction between embryonic and adult stem cell research in this regard?
It's all about DNA
Submitted by richb313 on Wed, 11/16/2011 - 7:09am.
The reason that embryonic stem cell research has not panned out is because those stem cells have a different DNA than the patient. What has never been discussed is that for embryonic stem cell therapy to work first a clone of the patient would have to be made in order to obtain stem cells that would not be rejected. Are we really willing to go down that road?
Adult stem cells are actually taken from the patient hence there is no rejection due to DNA differences. This explains why adult stem cell therapy has already had success.
In all the stories of embryonic stem cell research it is never mentioned that the only way to ensure there is no rejection would mean the use of cloned embryos yet thyat is the only way to get embryonic stem cells that will not be rejected. This story has been reported so dishonestly that the American People do not have the real facts.
Thanks for the info
Submitted by FastEd on Wed, 11/16/2011 - 10:10am.
I know that adult stem cells didn't "grow" tumors, but your explaination makes more sense and is logical to boot - maybe that's why the press hasn't 'got it'.
"We the People . . " Hey, congress - I'm one of the people - start listening!
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Does MJF want to get better or futher the causes of the left?
Submitted by okiehawk44 on Wed, 11/16/2011 - 12:14pm.
This ideological push to use embryonic stem cells may make liberals/leftists happy because it makes abortion more "noble" in their eyes but it takes away resources that could actually work to alleviate pain and suffering. I'm not at all sure this group really cares about that too much.