Completely shameless plug follows, but this is an area of research that matters a lot to me personally. My mother has neuropathy and is in a wheelchair. It's been rough watching her lose function, and now encouraging to see her regain some of her nerve function with immunotherapy and exercise.
I'm running the NYC Marathon to raise money for the Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation, a nonprofit organization dedicated to improving the lives of those with paralysis, mobility impairment, and spinal cord injury.
The Reeve Foundation has funded over $80 million for paralysis and spinal cord injury research. Scientists are learning more every year about how the spinal cord works, how nerve cells die and can be regenerated, and how new therapies can promote nerve regrowth. As a direct result of this research, there are people today who can breathe, control their bladder, and walk, after receiving treatment for severe spinal injury.
I ran this for the Reeve Foundation a few years ago. The NYC Marathon is an incredible event - so much energy all along the route. It's like a 26 mile party. Envious!
Update: Wow thank you so much! I posted my comment before going to bed, not really knowing what the response would be. I'm really grateful to everyone who has been visiting my page and donating. Very touched by the generosity of Hacker News.
The article notes, "This process of regeneration is made possible by olfactory ensheathing cells (OECs), which provide a pathway for the fibres to grow back." In other words, this was not an experimental treatment with stem cells (pluripotent cells). The story details here are interesting to me, as my late dad spent the last six years of his life paralyzed from the chin down from a spinal cord injury (a slip and fall on ice on a parking lot). His spinal cord was not completely severed, so he had quite a lot of sensation from the parts of his body that were immobilized, but he was not able to learn to walk with a walking frame even as well as the patient reported on here. (My dad's injury was much higher up on the spinal cord, which makes a big difference. His bruising of his spinal cord was at the second cervical vertebra.)
The article continues, "All those involved in the research are keen not to raise false hopes in patients and stress that the success will need to be repeated to show definitively whether it can stimulate spinal cord regeneration." Yes. This is a very early result, but there seems to be something here that has achieved results never before achieved, and if those results can be replicated in other patients, this will be great news.
The article mentions what kind of patients the experimental team is looking for. "Dr Tabakow said: "Our team in Poland would be prepared to consider patients from anywhere in the world who are suitable for this therapy. They are likely to have had a knife wound injury where the spinal cord has been cleanly severed." Many spinal cord injuries are bruises or tears rather than cuts, and may not heal as well with the technique described in the article. But this is a start, and may open up investigation of other approaches to repairing injuries to the spinal cord.
He's been doing this since the 70s. When I broke my back 10 years ago there was another panarama in which he'd shown dramatic improvement in rats.
He's only got round to spinal injury's now because its something occasionally improves without aid and is therefore unreliably for scientific tests. He was looking at other types of injury (I can't remember the name) where the nerves to the arm are torn out, as this never shows any signs of recovery.
He's now moved on to knife wounds as these offer the cleanest types of complete break ie very unlikely to improve later.
Raisman has been thorough and methodical about this. Its his life's work and I have no doubt he'll succeed
(I was actually in hospital with Dan Nicholls, whose father has been funding Reiman's research http://www.nsif.org.uk/)
It's easy to be confused about the time scale on this kind of work; it's hidden from public view until there's an appropriately newsworthy milestone.
As you point out, this is not a "Eureka!" moment at all; it's a waypoint on an arduous path that has taken decades of work, and will continue on (largely equally slowly) for a long time to come.
The operation discussed in the article was two years ago; it's taken that much time (with intense physical therapy the entire time!) before he has gotten the mobility he has now.
Interesting thing from reading the paper was that they deliberately didn't purify the olfactory ensheathing cells from the olfactory mucosa (OM) biopsy, as other work has shown it to be less effective if purified. So there may be other cell types or molecular factors at play here as well.
Another group has previously found some mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in the OM - or at least, cells with known MSC markers - so that's also a possibility for aiding repair. Very much looking forward to seeing where this research heads anyway.
I just heard this guy on Radio 4. The presenter gave him an opportunity to downplay the significance of this, and he didn't take it. He really believes he's onto something big.
When the presenter asked him about the 40-year wait, he went quiet; then said something about having a duty to help these sufferers by continuing the work. Pretty inspiring.
Counterpoint on the TV on SKY News from Dr. Mark Bacon from "Spinal Research" who says that this is nothing new, that it is not as significant as a "man walking on the moon" as has been claimed.
He says that this is essentially a feasibility study showing safety, and that it was the unique situation of the patient where the cut was very narrow and clean that allowed this to happen; most other spinal injuries damage much more of the spinal column. He said he also wants to quantify exactly how much of the shown result was directly a result of the surgery. The patient had lots of different treatments and they don't know how much those had an effect.
However, when the interviewer said, "although you've added a note of caution there, should people with these kinds of injuries have a bit more hope now that this news has come out?" the response was, "absolutely, it shows that we are making inroads into this. This area, even just a few years ago was thought to be dead, but now we are making clinical trials."
I'm dubious of the "walking again" claims though. Sure it's awesome he's regained feeling - that's the story here. But his so-called walking is between parallel bars or with a walker, both with full calipers. Complete paraplegics can do this by just swinging their legs, and it looks like what this guy was doing. They showed him lying on a bed, I wish they'd show just what leg movement - if any - he's regained.
That's amazing. I really hope that more research is done in (stem) cells. It shows outstanding promise, and it seems safe to assume that this is just the start for a technique of treatments that revolutionizes the way we view and treat illness.
Edit: The article did not mention stem cells, but I think stem cells will inevitably be discussed in this thread as they're a very closely related topic, hence the mention.
Re stem cells - my sister is a vet, she says currently animals get much better treatment than people because stem cells are experimental for people, but routinely used on animals, and the effects are astonishing.
She also have this conspiracy theory about sport stars returning to sport 3 months after especially bad injuries - they must get stem cells, it's impossible otherways.
I don't know if it's true, I hope it is because it means it will eventually be used on regular people as well.
I think it's a shame that this kind of experimentation is not done in a way that maximises the well being of mankind. Paralysed rats were sucessfully got to walk again at least as early as 2003 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x8e2qsAVGc) and it would seem to make sense to experiment on the odd human but instead we have to wait decades I think at least partly to cover the regulators arses in case there are any problems. But it would be better for society to have the odd experimental problem than thousands people suffer for years while they muck about with paperwork and the like.
I see from Wikipedia that Geron Corporation have recently submitted 28,000 pages of documents to the FDA for a stem cell related trial so maybe in 2023 or some such we'll be able to do for people what we could do for rats in 2003.
>She also have this conspiracy theory about sport stars returning to sport 3 months after especially bad injuries - they must get stem cells, it's impossible otherways.
No conspiracy, they are all using HGH. Someone did some analysis on the shortened recovery times for players with ligament tears (like ACLs) and found that while the recovery times have always been getting shorter thanks to improvements in physical therapy, but the there was a dramatic drop at about the time HGH started to be widely used.
The NFL just started lasting for HGH last month. The test supposedly is easy to beat, but it will be interesting to see if it has an effect on times.
My (sensory) neuropathy is total peanuts in comparison to being paralyzed but I still wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. It does not build character in any way. It eats away at me because the pain is so hard to control. No amount of anything in the afterlife is going to balance this out. All I can do is wait it out and try everything thrown at me to see what might stick.
The idea that I'm supposed to sit around and take it - because faith! - is quite frankly deeply offensive.
Wherever it came from it is an insensitive and antiquated quote.
There is nothing noble or character building about someone who has become a quadraplegic, lost all bowel and sexual function control and now relies almost entirely on strangers for day to day living. It recently happened to my sister-in-law and it's a truly devastating situation. If we can remove suffering in the world then we should.
I once heard a story from an old man, about wrestling at a small town school. He was in a very light weight class, such that when the school played matches against other schools, the opposing team might not even have anyone in his class. So rather than sit and watch, he wrestled above his weight class. Instead of seeking to win, sought to delay the pin as long as possible. So he practiced neck bridges, and developed the thickest neck on a skinny kid that you have ever seen. He took his own version of victory--namely that the heavier wrestler could not score a pin on him within the match time limit--from what might otherwise be considered defeat. There was no possibility of true victory, only the choice between aristeia--doing the best you possibly can--and resignation to defeat.
There was no expectation that anyone owed him a fair match. He just tackled the challenge before him to the best of his ability, and lost every time, until he finally won.
And now he has an interesting story to tell, for as long as he can keep the reaper from pinning him.
That HN is unwelcoming and intolerant towards people of faith?
All the faith in the world won't move us an inch closer to the stars. If the blind are going to see, the lame are going to walk, and the mute are going to speak, we'll have to make it happen ourselves.
I haven't downvoted any of your comments here, but I don't think a statement implying that you believe stem cells are immoral is much of a contribution to the conversation.
I think it's going to be difficult to have a productive conversation here on the reasons for believing it's immoral, but you didn't even try to acknowledge that there is some nuance when it comes to stem cells, you just tossed your morality out there for everyone to chew on.
And there needs to be nuance, since induced pluripotent stem cells are generally more interesting than embryonic stem cells, due to the induced patient derived cells not causing an immune response.
Or do you also believe that iPS cells are a moral quagmire?
Your interpretation of your faith != people of faith, sdegutis. I prefer a civil discussion of medical ethics to simple down voting myself. Feel free to drop a little bit more on your views here.
I'm a bit rusty but I did once have a very sharp Christian theological blade. I'll see if I can make you feel more at home and respected.
I assume at least some of the downvotes were given simply that he was off topic. The ethical issues of using embryonic stem cells are hardly applicable to grafting one's own cells from one part of the body to another.
Downvotes are a strong signal that your comment was generally regarded as either incorrect, irrelevant, or hurtful. In this case probably a bit of all three.
You'll find you get the best result on HN when you speak for yourself not for groups, speak on topic by contributing your personal knowledge or asking questions about TFA, and don't condescend the network because you failed to follow the guidelines.
That people don't find the downvoted material to be a substantive addition to the discussion.
> That HN is unwelcoming and intolerant towards people of faith?
As a person of faith who has been around HN a while, I don't find it that way. That the community may have reacted negatively to the particular way you expressed your faith in this particular discussion does not mean that the community is "unwelcoming and intolerant toward people of faith".
Unless they edited something there was no mention of embryonic stem cell research.
As to tolerance for religion that's not actually something I believe in. It's at best cruel and at worst a sick twisted perversion both promoting and feeding off of mindless ingrorance and human suffering.
...which has nothing whatsoever to do with this case.
EDIT: Your ninja edit doesn't make stem cells, let alone embryonic stem cells, any more relevant to the article, or the discussion this breakthrough warrants.
I don't agree with equating "downvoting" with "intolerance", but if you do, then yes, I am intolerant of your blanket classification of stem cell research as immoral.
Please try to be more tolerant of stem cell research. Much of it is not morally questionable at all.
As one of the downvoters: I object to the mindset that prefers people to suffer so they can build some character over attempting to cure them strong enough that I felt a downvote (and a flag for that matter) was the appropriate response.
I'm fine with expressions of faith, this isn't one of those.
So you downvoted and flagged him for something he didn't say?
The now-dead comment that seems to have sparked most of this said that cures should be sought from faith and science and that if all else fails, suffering patiently could serve a purpose of building character.
Frankly, if all else fails to bring about a cure, the suffering is a given.
He's suggesting an approach to dealing with unavoidable suffering that might find at least something good out of it. Surely that's worth consideration.
sdegutis has stated that he was referring to stem cell research, and he advocated that it was immoral and thus should be avoided at all costs.
Perhaps the suffering is not unavoidable after all if stem cell research would not be subject to religious beliefs. Perhaps some parts of stem cell research are morally questionable, but certainly not all. This is what is objectionable.
I've heard about the remarkable ability of nasal nerves to regrow, and it's fantastic that they seem to be able to translate this to the spine. I wonder about other nerve bundles. My mother lost her vision due to optic nerve damage, and this seems like a very promising technology. I hope they can repeat the result.
As far as I can tell, this is the paper [1]. It was published a little over twelve months ago, so that's a pretty big lag before the news article. Was there perhaps a follow-up that I missed?
Yeah - kind of. The BBC's Panorama show (kind of linked to BBC News, but long documentaries) has had special access to his rehabilitation over the last year, that special airs tonight.
The operation itself was two years ago, but then it's taken 2 years of physical therapy (and just healing time...) before it's become clear how successful it was.
So there's no single moment when this becomes "newsworthy"; but I'd assume that as of recently, the patient is walking at a level that's sufficiently impressive for a newscast, and so today's the day.
do you think the same technique can be used to reproduce damaged optical nerves ? this could be a huge step towards curing a huge percentage of blindness, something Ive been very personally interested in lately.
am I the only one who wonders why the slow pace of such crucial medical discoveries ? after a successful attempt, the future plan is treating only 10 more patients over the next 'years'. In Silicon valley timezone thats centuries, my non-medical tech corrupt mind is screaming pump money, replicate this to 100 patients in the next 60 days and scale, scale, scale!!!
> replicate this to 100 patients in the next 60 days and scale, scale, scale!!!
Most likely the fear of any unknown side effects that haven't manifested just yet, and the ability to refine whatever procedure was performed to try and minimise any of the long term downsides to this approach?
I doubt what is keeping this from scaling is fear of unknown side-effects. I bet people would be lining up to be a guinea-pig to this if regulation allowed.
>> "replicate this to 100 patients in the next 60 days and scale, scale, scale!!!"
Safety. What is there are horrible side effects that only show after 12/18/24 months and suddenly the lives of 100's of people are ruined? You could make that clear to people and if they want to participate despite the warnings let them but most people aren't well informed enough to make a rational decision.
There are some very reasonable and very scary tumor possibilities associated with stem cell research. Trading paraplegia for spinal cancer is not a good trade. Caution is a very, very good idea.
That said, this result should, in a just world, dramatically increase sources of funding and research worldwide.
40 years without turning your back on a project... probably "heroic" is one of the words describing it.
I suppose the biggest "bottleneck" in the progress of such work is testing.
What is the current state of computer simulations of bio systems? Is OpenWorm the biggest project in this direction? If I remember correctly, they weren't exactly simulating completely down to the cellular organelle (or atomic) level, but instead simulated starting from higher level of abstraction (muscle contraction etc.).
I'm assuming that a treatment like this will likely be much more successful with a more recent injury?
From what I understand once a nerve is injured processes continue that result in less and less activity. When you're treating an injury as old as his, you not only have to "make the connections", but also reverse any nerve atrophy (for lack of a better word).
A friend of mine commented on Facebook using the word "merely" as in merely transplanted some cells. I've got the feeling a lot more complex science and medicine went into this, can anyone provide some more detail in layman's terms?
What about it? Scientists are doing a trial run in Pennsylvania now where they put people with multiple gunshot wounds in suspended animation for up to two hours. They expect little brain damage. Get it up to a few more hours, and I think successful transplants can happen. Also, as other posters had noted, this man had been paralyzed for 2 years. If you fixed the cut immediately I assume there would be less functional degeneration and scar tissue.
Astonishing breakthrough that offers great hope to millions of people. When one considers the great complexity of nerves in the spinal column, makes this news even more remarkable.
I'm running the NYC Marathon to raise money for the Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation, a nonprofit organization dedicated to improving the lives of those with paralysis, mobility impairment, and spinal cord injury.
The Reeve Foundation has funded over $80 million for paralysis and spinal cord injury research. Scientists are learning more every year about how the spinal cord works, how nerve cells die and can be regenerated, and how new therapies can promote nerve regrowth. As a direct result of this research, there are people today who can breathe, control their bladder, and walk, after receiving treatment for severe spinal injury.
If this is an issue that you are interested in, please consider a donation: http://www.christopherreeve.org/nyc2014/bhousel
Thanks for listening..