Your viewing articles about; stem cells

Bone marrow donations could become profitable as a result of lawsuit

Current US law bans bone marrow donors to profit. However, a lawsuit filed by the Institute for Justice challenges this prohibition as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause.

Bone marrow transplantation (BMT) involves taking a healthy sample of stem cells from bone marrow belonging to a healthy donor. This is then injected into the bone marrow of the donee. The new stem cells take over the production of the blood cells.

The Institute for Justice (IJ) filed suit against Attorney General Eric Holder Jr., asking that he be enjoined, (Refrained) from enforcing the federal criminal prohibition on compensating bone marrow donors. The prohibition is contained in the National Organ Transplant Act (NOTA) of 1984.

MoreMarrowDonors.org, the non-profit group, recruited the IJ to file the lawsuit to overturn the ban and allow for compensation to be made to donors.

Shaka Mitchell, president of MoreMarrowDonors.org said: “We think that there is much folly in a government law standing between a patient and a potentially life-saving program,”

Other plaintiffs in the suit include patients suffering from blood diseases like leukemia.

The plaintiffs argue that preventing sick people in need of bone marrow transplants from offering compensation to donors who could make those transplants possible, violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The counter concern is that payments will encourage individuals to conceal health conditions in order for donations to be accepted.

Bone marrow contains cells that are capable of becoming other types of blood cells. Thus they can be very beneficial and therapeutic for people with certain blood diseases.

An overturn of the ban could have a large impact on physicians, donors, and especially patients, including those with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and although the lawsuit may take a number of years to work its way through the federal court system.

In the meantime, news and media coverage may raise awareness of the shortage of bone marrow donors and trigger more donors to the registry.

         

Welcome back! If you love Baby Chums, please subscribe to our RSS feed.
Thanks for dropping by and enjoy!

---

British couple freezes baby’s umbilical cord for future

The British couple is thought to be the first to take advantage of the service, calling it a ‘potential life-saver’ for their child in the future.

Paula Aspinall, of Northwich, Cheshire, wants future mothers to know that umbilical cord tissue has potential life-saving value. Research has shown cells from umbilical tissue can be used in various ways including the repair of damaged bone or muscle and the treatment of nerve damage.

Paula and her partner, Peter, are thought to be the first British couple to take advantage of the freezing service by Future Health Technologies, Ltd. The couple paid almost £2,000 for the service which cryogenically stores the umbilical tissue and blood samples for a period of 20 years.

Not only will the cells be of life-saving value to their son, Daniel, but there is a high likelihood that the cells will be useful to Daniel’s sister or parents.

“I think it is a waste that the cord is routinely thrown away,” said Paula Aspinall.

“I know the chances of needing this sample are very slim, and I genuinely hope we never have to use it. But the umbilical cord helps give life right from the start, so why not make it a potential lifesaver for the future?”

A spokesman for Future Health Technologies agreed. “With this new service we are extending the options for parents to put something aside for their family’s future health.”

“No one would wish that they might have to use this but it is there if they need it.”

The company has been maintaining samples of blood from umbilical cords for years, but saw an opportunity to expand freezing and storage operations for the benefit of future generations.

         

Artificial sperm and eggs created in the laboratory

Human Sperm and eggs have been grown in the laboratory in a breakthrough process that could change parenthood forever. Infertile men and women could have children that are biologically their own.

Moral and ethical concerns are high, particularly as children being born through entirely artificial means becomes possible, leaving men and women sidelined from the process of making babies.

The U.S. government-funded research, published in the prestigious journal Nature, centres on stem cells, ‘master cells’.

Stanford University scientists found the right cocktail of chemicals and vitamins to coax the cells into turning into eggs and sperm.

The sperm had heads and short tails and are thought to have been mature enough to fertilize an egg.

The eggs were at a much earlier stage but were still much more developed than any created so far by other scientists.

The double success raises the prospect of men and women one day ‘growing’ their own sperm and eggs for use in IVF treatments.

The American team used stem cells taken from embryos in the first days of life but hope to repeat the process with slivers of skin.

The skin cells would first be exposed to a mixture that wound back their biological clocks to embryonic stem cell state, before being transformed into sperm or eggs.

Starting with a person’s own skin would also mean the lab-grown sperm or eggs would not be rejected by the body.

The breakthrough could also unlock many of the secrets of egg and sperm production, leading to new drug treatments for infertility, a little understood condition that affects one in six couples.

Defects in sperm and egg development are the biggest cause of infertility but, because many of the key stages occur in the womb, scientists have struggled to study the process in detail.

A greater understanding of the process could also produce a pill that slows the ageing of a woman’s own stock of eggs, delaying menopause.

Dr Allan Pacey, a Sheffield University expert in male fertility said: ‘Ultimately this may help us find a cure for male infertility.

‘Not necessarily by making sperm in the laboratory, I personally think that it unlikely but by identifying new targets for drugs or genes that may stimulate sperm production to occur naturally.

‘This is a long way off, but it is a laudable dream.’

But critics say it is wrong to meddle with the building blocks of life.

Dr Peter Saunders, of the Christian Medical Fellowship, said that IVF should be the preserve of married couples.

He said: ‘We are very keen to promote ethical IVF treatments which respect the sanctity of life and the marriage bond.

‘The question is, why are we creating artificial gametes (eggs and sperm) and aborting 200,000 babies a year when there are many, many couples willing to adopt?’

Anthony Ozimic, of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, said: ‘As with IVF, artificial insemination and the use of donor gametes, the use of artificial gametes in reproduction would distort and damage relations between family members.

‘There are no instances of any major medical advance achieved by abandoning basic ethical principles such as safeguarding the right to life.’

Dr Reijo Pera said any future use of artificial eggs and sperm would have to be subject to guidelines.

She said: ‘Whether one builds the boundaries on religion or just on an internal sense of right and wrong, these are important.

‘In this field, it is not “anything goes”.’