#embryonicstemcell

Our Stem Cell Doctors Can #Regenerate Damaged Or Failing Cells And Tissues To Create New Hope And #Renewed Health For Our Stem Cell Patients

Global Stem Cell Care  Wants Everyone To Be Able To Benefit From Ground Breaking Regenerative Therapies.

#Mesenchymal Stem Cells Have The Ability To Reduce Inflammation And Modulate The #ImmuneSystem

Stem Cells Basic #Properties And #Clinical Applications 

Stem Cells Could Be Used To Study #Disease, Identify New #Drugs, Or Screen Drugs For #Toxic Side Effects.

#MSCs Also Stimulate The Nearly Cells By Releasing #GrowthFactors.

Researchers Have Already Tried Differentiating Embryonic Stem Cells Into These Type Of Cells, So Treatments Are Promising.

To know more about Stem Cell Treatment visit 

https://www.viezec.com

or Call us at +91-9650760803 

-- By Sparshita Nag

“I am all in support of Stem Cell research until it is Embryonic Stem Cells that are involved. I would go to hell if I did such a thing”. Thus spoke a dedicated follower of the Mayo Clinic blog below their post on their latest research utilizing Adipose Derived stem cells for Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (the disease that has affected Stephen Hawking)

Anybody even remotely related to biology would know the furore caused in the past years over the use of embryonic stem cells(ESCs) in research, about how it was unethical to do so and the various governments yielding to pressure and stalling any further creation of new cell lines thereby crashing all hope of changing the research scenario for good,  in a jiffy.

Point is, what led to the development of such a negative impression about the use of these cells? Whether or not this situation could have been handled more delicately is the million dollar question. However, here comes the role of effective communication in science to the general public.

To begin with, Embryonic Stem cells are an easy enough target of controversy thanks to their very name. It appears and I’m quite sure it is also popular belief that these stem cells are derived from in-utero embryos from a live pregnancy. Some also like to think that aborted foetuses are stealthily whisked into labs and macerated to obtain these cells. Think about a layman getting such a perception and the hue and cry raised on this subject is almost justified!

The truth as we know is that these cells were actually obtained from spare embryos created in labs during in-vitro fertilization procedures with prior full written and informed consent of the donor parents. These are the embryos that are in excess of the one that is artificially implanted into the uterus of the ovum-donor (mother) and would otherwise be “discarded as anatomical waste into the bin”. 

Technically speaking, these cells simply cannot be sourced from abortuses because mostly, abortuses are foetuses and not embryos. What’s the difference? Well, an embryo is the stage from Day 2 to Day 9 post fertilization in the womb. After this stage, it is called a foetus. The whole notion of extracting ESCs from live pregnancies also becomes invalidated given most pregnancies are diagnosed after 15 days of fertilization when the baby does not remain an embryo anymore! If a point is made by Ethics organizations about “killing a life for research”, it could very well be argued that being utilized for research certainly allows the unborn life to serve a purpose for greater good rather than being thrown into the incinerator and destroyed!

I strongly feel the need to convey and educate the general public about this to prevent stem cell researchers being considered as merciless butchers of innocent unborn lives. Responsible reporting has a huge potential in busting the existing myths to modify public perception towards the use of these absolutely fantastic cells in research. After all it is media that conveys the breakthroughs and controversies in the otherwise guarded research world to the general public.

As a member of the Triple Helix Society in UCL, I had the privilege to attend a talk on “Power writing in Science” by Mr. Olle Bergman of Lund University, Sweden. Olle, a chemical engineer by education was drawn towards a career as a Communications Consultant, Public speaker and writer with the aim of popularizing science among lay public by presenting complicated concepts in a simplified, illustrated and entertaining manner. The session was an enriching experience for aspiring writers in science who share the same ideology as his. Not only did he share tips on how to go about it but importantly highlighted the fact that how presenting facts in a crisp, clear and honest manner could go on to shape favourable public perception and participation. It could prevent any misunderstanding that could otherwise interfere with potentially beneficial research work (as in the case of the fate of Embryonic Stem Cell research).

Olle aptly quoted H.L. Mencken in his talk saying, “There are no dull subjects. There are only dull writers”. Taking a cue from this, I wish to encourage people of science to open up regarding their research, to reach out to the general public. They have full right to know where their taxes are being utilized. What better source of information for them than the researcher himself/herself? With an array of social media platforms and blogging available, it is not a difficult task I believe. 

Scientific journals were supposed to serve the purpose of popularizing research. Unfortunately in this era of cut-throat professional rivalry, they have instead fallen prey to commercialisation and now serve as a means to climb the career ladder. Commercialisation is something that plagues the media too which is probably why spiced-up controversies/hyped versions of the true picture make way to our breakfast table through newspapers more easily than sensible, plane-jane version of a news report. Let’s face it, media successfully taps the inherent “scandal-loving” nature of humans here. In addition, our branch of study (Regenerative Medicine) being a relatively new and sensitive concept, misunderstandings can be fairly common.

It is our duty to give general public the full correct picture of our work to save our sacred profession from being sometimes misunderstood. It is us who should shrug-off any traces of ego, be pro-active in educating people about what we invest our neurons in and how it would benefit the community! Of course we should also highlight the cons alongside the pros. Our transparency would prevent impulsive, unwarranted and unwanted public reaction, be it positive or negative. Maybe the general perception on Embryonic Stem Cell research would have been different today if public education on the matter had been more honest and enthusiastic.

Let us not allow such misunderstandings to ruin any valuable scientific work or waste government resources anymore. Come on fellow researchers, Let’s write!

Signing off

Sparshita, on behalf of the team :)