This is why funding pure science research for the sake of discovery is important. Funding only the things that have potential commercial use is hampering our research methodology in ways we only begin to comprehend.
@@oldvlognewtricks are you kidding me? I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or serious but there’s very little done for erectile dysfunction. I’m 23 and I had all the time from puberty all the way to 20 years old to have normal sexual health, it all went down hill after taking antidepressants, I haven’t got help with it either, viagra doesn’t help orgasm and most pills they offer to counter sexual dysfunction don’t work in everyone, medical science is far from done. I also live in chronic pain as a result of an adverse reaction to a medication, im not bluffing about this either, OP is right, more funding into science instead of wars will probably revolutionize medicine and our lives in ways majority of healthy people can’t understand. Also weight loss pills are not helping anybody, I’d compare them to viagra, they’re not the end all be all drug, they do not fix our metabolism or fix the erectile dysfunction especially if the person is overweight
IPSCs also play a huge role in research. For example they are used to grow organoids from stem cells obtained from the patient's skin cells. Then, the organoids can be studied and compared to control organoids to possibly spot the genetic origin of a certain disease.
Not only that but organoids are also used in personalised medicine and disease modelling. Although, some of the personalised medicine studies are now moving to the use of patient terminally differentiated cells. And disease mechanism studies rely more on adult stem cells instead as IPSC only give you embryonic/feotal organoids. The value of IPSCs for organoid research is really in development and aging.
Yamanaka factors also lead to development of reversing the age of the cell to age 0 without turning it into a pluripotent stem cell. This means we can now reverse aging the problem is safety trials as well as a delivery system. we do not know how to deliver yamanaka factors into so many different types of cells. First human trials should be finished in 2 years (restoring sight to the blind) comment if you'd like to know more!
The whole giving you cancer thing is certainly one of the main downsides! That and the spectrum of dosage, since it inevitably wont be taken up evenly.
This statement just feels generalized to the point it loses most accuracy. No cell cam be “turned to age 0” (not even the iPSCs) ‘cuz any living cell continues to accumulate random, spontaneous mutations. Without the ability to somehow reverse those, you will always just keep producing less and less functional (maybe even cancerous at some point) cells. The way nature circumvents the problem is summarized in the concept of natural selection (so basically, nature doesn’t solve anything really). Accumulating, disadvantageous mutations will naturally be selected against either biological (failure to complete embryonic development) or ecologically (reduced fitness). This principle works as it applies to an entire population and doesn’t work on an individual level
You are right that delivery of Yamanaka factors into cells will be a challenge, although the recent Covid-19 vaccines represent a major advancement in delivery of mRNA to cells using lipid nanoparticles.
It's cool that I've been watching scishow for a decade, both in the classroom and in my adult life. The fun approach to topics is always refreshing. There's an object positivity that seems to cloud out the real world for a few brief minutes.
One point of critique though: SciShow seems be allergic to pauses. Do the editors think we all have ADHD? We don't. I will never understand why this type of editing was chosen.
Great video! One of the things you didn’t mention is although the iPSC themselves aren’t used for many approved therapies, there are many iPSC DERIVED cell therapies in the clinic and in trials such as immune cell transplants to treat cancer. These offer huge off the shelf potential even if it’s not the iPSC themselves but the differentiated cell lineage
Yes agreed, there is still good potential for iPSC-derived cell therapy in the future, so I slightly disagree with the pessimistic outlook of this video. For example, there is now a clinical trial for treating Type I Diabetes with iPSC-derived pancreatic beta cells "off the shelf". (For more info, search ViaCyte). These cells are genetically modified to evade the host immune system, as MHC genes have been deleted by CRISPR. From the FDA's standpoint, iPSC-derived cells are risky because they may be contaminated with undifferentiated iPSCs, which are known to cause cancerous teratomas in mice. In recent years, techniques have been developed to solve this problem by killing off, sorting out, or culturing away the undifferentiated iPSCs before injecting the cells into the patient. However, it is difficult to be absolutely sure that every last undifferentiated iPSC has been removed from the cells, when only one single iPSC cell may be enough to cause cancer in the patient. I think that it is only a matter of time before these techniques are advanced enough to convince the FDA to routinely approve iPSC-based therapies, but the question is, "how long?"
Really really hope we can grow new healthy tissue for living beings soon. The kind of he if it that could have for stroke victims and all other sorts of ailments would be unreal.
They are growing vascularized organoids in laboratories right now, although they are not full-sized organs. One promising technique is to obtain an animal organ, kill off all the animal cells, and have iPSC-derived human cells repopulate the extracellular matrix which serves as a 3D scaffold for the cells to grow. Yet another interesting technique is the 3D printing of cells using a biological 3D printer. Replacing old tissue in the patient with young tissue would probably go a long way toward extending human lifespan.
I wonder if if they can grow organs from the patient's stemcells it means that they would no longer need immunosuppressants since their body would hopefully not reject it, which would mean they aren't so at risk for diseases. I really hope so!
@@neuswoesje590 That is absolutely correct, and that is one reason why there is so much excitement around iPSCs. Organs and tissues made from a patient's own cells are not rejected by the patient's immune system because the cells of the organ/tissue will display proteins (i.e. MHC and other proteins) on the cell surface. The immune cells (i.e. T cells and natural killer cells) will recognize those proteins as "self" and regard the cells as friendly. The other reason why iPSCs are exciting is because they can divide endlessly, so it is possible to make as many iPSC-derived cells, tissues, and organs as needed by the patient. This has the potential to revolutionize the organ transplant industry, and maybe allow us to live longer, more productive lives. However, iPSCs have an important drawback. iPSCs carry a high risk of forming cancerous teratomas when injected into an animal host. Cell therapies and organs/tissues based on iPSCs always carry the risk that some undifferentiated iPSCs may remain in the cells, organs, or tissues to be transplanted into the patient, thus exposing the patient to cancer risk. On the other hand, adult pluripotent stem cells such as VSELs and Muse cells do not form cancerous teratomas and do not carry any cancer risk. Like iPSCs, they are obtained from the patient, carry the patient's DNA, are recognized as friendly by the patient's immune system, are pluripotent, and can differentiate into any cell type. Some adult pluripotent stem cells have demonstrated practically limitless number of cell divisions [Ref: Henry E. Young, Asa C. Black, "Adult-derived stem cells" 2005. Cancer Gene Mechanisms And Gene Therapy]. Furthermore, when adult pluripotent stem cells are injected intravenously into the patient or animal host, the cells automatically migrate to areas of damage in the body, and then differentiate and engraft into the tissue at a high level of efficiency (typically greater than 20%). Thus, repair is long-term, as opposed to the short-term effects of other types of cell therapy such as MSC therapy. Muse cells are now in clinical trials in Japan.
Would be nice to see this advance more in nerves and skin regeneration. Burnt my eyelids off years ago and still waitin to get new eyelids to progress towards getting my eyesight back.
Although we don't have a lot of clinical trials using iPSCs, we do have an considerable number of stem cell teraphie studies (both in human and rodents). Lately, a lot of progress has been made to study the use of extracellular vesicles released from these stem cells as therapy source. They have the benefit of not being able to mutate after injection. There's a lot to say about that (trust me I know, I work in a lab that study the use of those for stroke therapy), but I dare to say that future is promising (even if expensive at the begging)
There are some developments you might have missed, we have successfully grown (mini) human eyes, there are a relatively new class of polymer gels that have promising futures for neuron regeneration, and if I recall correctly there have been advances in specifically optical implants but with the guy who has the flashlight prosthetic I can't find the articles for the last one, sorry
@@ConstantChaos1 From my research there was the argus 2/orion sight implant that flashes in your eye that I will take a hard pass on right now. for the growth of eyes, the only thing I have found on that over the years is just the front part of the eye, I think it is called the cornea, the front clear portion of your eye. that is cool and all and have had 3 cornia transplants when I had molten metal explode in my eyes but since I burnt off my eyelids and nerves, no doctor/surgeon wants to ouch me right now. The worst part is supposedly boston eye and ear has a procedure in a procedure called cornial plastisis. More specifically, caraded plastisis tyep 2. sry for that spelling, not sure how to properly spell that but that is as far as I can find so far even though I lost my eyesight 7 yrs ago, there still sin't much of tech or willing individuals to help get my eyesight back.
@@peggedyourdad9560 well I do have a video on my channel by to give you briefly. I was trying to build a business creating trinkets out of molten metal. The molten metal blew up in my face one day after accidentally capturing some water underneath the molten aluminum. Some got my eyes salmon got my mouth some got on my chest.
My lab has used iPSCs (and the cells we turn them into) from multiple sclerosis patients to try to figure out what's going wrong in the MS brain. Love seeing them be talked about more!
This also has tie-ins to cancer researcher Given that cancer is basically just stem cells running amuck, and there is evidence that the same process that causes stem cells to specialize into a given cell type can cause cancer cells to revert back to being normal cells.
Recently, studies have shown that cancer cells can be converted back into normal cells, and even differentiate, by inhibiting certain ion channels (e.g. potassium ion channels) in their plasma membrane. Because this effect is seen in a wide variety of ion channels, there is a hypothesis that electric membrane potential (i.e. voltage across the membrane) may drive cancer. Cancer cells are known to be electrically different than normal cells. Interestingly, after ion channel inhibition, the effect seems to be permanent and long-lasting. This indicates that the long-term state of the cancer cell has changed upon ion channel inhibition. In addition, ion channel inhibition may be relatively non-toxic to normal cells, at least compared to existing chemotherapy drugs. Aged and/or senescent cells also seem to have abnormal electric membrane potential compared to normal or young cells, and it would be interesting to see whether ion channel inhibition might provide a long-term, anti-aging effect on aged tissues. For more info, search Michael Levin and "cancer". He is also on UA-cam.
Great show. Fascinating insights into the unexpected applications of research and why we should never lose hope. Also, Rose Bear's voice is much more pleasing to listen to rather than the yelling of Hank Green!
Patrick Riordan's clinic in Panama has been treating patients with considerable success. Also there's a clinic in Boca Raton cultivating patients' stem cell.
Don't worry I'm just going to sit here with optic nerve damage for the next few decades until someone finally decides we actually need stem cell therapy.
@@emmettturner9452 i watch scishow to fall asleep at night before waking up on a two hour long symposium for medieval literature like everybody else thanks
The main issue why ipsc is found to have more mutations is because 1. Cells that are reprogrammed may already contained some levels of mutations that is carried forward after it is reprogrammed. 2. Most reprogramming methods involved integration of extra genetic materials that knocks in the genes randomly, causes random mutations to occur. It’d be a good idea to monitor and often sequence the genome to monitor these mutations from occurring. In a preventive effort, may need to use a non-integrating methods in ipsc generation. But of course currently it’s not that efficient, maybe the next person to produce a mutation-free ipsc might get a nobel prize 🤷🏻♂️
It sounds like anything is possible, including the potential of turning a cherry from a living plant into a living and talking being, even if it means that'd going to be a hybrid of a plant that produces cherries. You can say that it's impossible, however, All we need is something new to explore. Maybe that cherry would have something we don't
I really hope we can regenerate the retina in humans like in mice. In general we need nerve repairs. So many people with chronic pain and getting addicted to pills and going on disability.
I remember when I read the Yamanaka paper back in the days. First thing I thought was: that's a Nobel prize, right there! Anyway, I foresee the same happening for CRISPR as therapy
Advances now have so many required safeguards that the time to take scientific discovery to consumer products is ridiculous. An old writer (maybe Shakespeare?) suggested executing all baristers. That might be a net positive for humanity.
I like the fact that they cance a study of untested theraputics when the evidence shows injury because of their use. Too bad this principal is not used for all treatments including those granted emergency use authorization.
Interestingly enough I was once told by a retired Nurse I respected that there is another place labs could get stem cells other than embryos. She told me that if they could harvest the placenta after birth they could use that to obtain stem cells. Not quite sure how that would work but it seems that if she was right this could enable more stem cell research.
As someone in the field, there is so much more to this story that was missed - it might even 'reverse aging'. Epigenetic reprogramming can be applied in live animals to partly 'reverse aging', which has been shown by top labs (e.g. Belmonte, Serrano, Sinclair) in multiple different organs. Altos labs recently got $3B funding from people like Bezos, likely the largest startup raise in history, just to advance this research. This technique is specifically known as partial epigenetic reprogramming, which unlike 'full' reprogramming, aims to rejuvenate adult cells without taking them back all the way to stem cells (which would become a tumor). Not only does this have the potential to reverse age-related diseases like glaucoma or Alzheimer's, it might also treat genetic orphan diseases like progeria.
I don't even care about reversing aging, this sounds like it has the potential to cure so many currently untreatable diseases like arthritis and neuro-degeneration. I hope I see it in my lifetime.
Colombia has an active stem cell research facility and they still help people with chronic pain gain some sort of normal life. Stem cells aren't wrong, people's feelings just tend to ruin what could possibly be a step towards a disease free world.
Something about a pig with human organs feels wrong... What if someone were to eat the pig? Though I think it's just the idea of a pig being opened up for human organs that seems disturbing for the most part.
A weird take on iPSC research, because literally everyone predicted they would first be useful for basic research. Apart from people raising funds for their start-ups, everyone also knew most of the first clinical trials would fail. That's just statistically what happens with new technology in biology, and there were concerns very early on that iPSC weren't equivalent to normal PSC, and that the yield is just too low. I don't the hype for iPSC has ever died down, and many cell biologists concerned with medical applications are still working on making it work, either by optimisation of the methods, or combining it with other ideas.
Wait, so dopamine production and Parkinson's are related? So does that mean cigarettes delay the onset of Parkinson's by triggering the reward center of the brain? That could mean early diagnosis for Parkinson's by utilizing GABA, Gamma Amino Butyric Acid, which interferes with reward in regards to addictions. Also could mean treatment options for Parkinson's patients with dopamine infusions, or stimulus. That is something!
I thing dna coding systems should be integrated/shncronised with c9mputers, so the subsystems can be handled by object orientated/libraty based automated subsystems therefore awerage human mind cancontrol that modifications. Otherwise its far more complex then one human mind can control/imagine ;)
Sounded like that to me ... but she did say "structures LIKE an embryo". Embryonic development is megacomplex, subtle, and badly understood. So, no ... (but in the long run maybe yes?).
We're still so far off from having practical applications out in the wild that can achieve mass adoption as a proven medical procedure, but god I am hopeful. We probably won't see anything like that for like 10-20 years, but that's just a wild guess.
So... If you make ipscs out of yourself and start that development process that turns it into a fetus and it becomes a baby. Is that you? Or is it your baby?
This is why funding pure science research for the sake of discovery is important. Funding only the things that have potential commercial use is hampering our research methodology in ways we only begin to comprehend.
At least we have a bunch of research into weight loss and erectile dysfunction 🙄
And the non-existent link between vaccines and autism
@@oldvlognewtricks are you kidding me? I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or serious but there’s very little done for erectile dysfunction. I’m 23 and I had all the time from puberty all the way to 20 years old to have normal sexual health, it all went down hill after taking antidepressants, I haven’t got help with it either, viagra doesn’t help orgasm and most pills they offer to counter sexual dysfunction don’t work in everyone, medical science is far from done. I also live in chronic pain as a result of an adverse reaction to a medication, im not bluffing about this either, OP is right, more funding into science instead of wars will probably revolutionize medicine and our lives in ways majority of healthy people can’t understand.
Also weight loss pills are not helping anybody, I’d compare them to viagra, they’re not the end all be all drug, they do not fix our metabolism or fix the erectile dysfunction especially if the person is overweight
Gotta learn what's possible before we can find ways to exploit it for profit
exactly
how do you think PCR was developed? People didnt even know what afreaking taq POL was back in the day
Thanks! We love SciShow.
IPSCs also play a huge role in research. For example they are used to grow organoids from stem cells obtained from the patient's skin cells. Then, the organoids can be studied and compared to control organoids to possibly spot the genetic origin of a certain disease.
I came home from my job at the iSPC factory today, and I barely made enough research and genetic origins to feed my family.
... that's precisely what the video said...
As a kidney farmer, i agree
@@Mookle123 did you grow food for your family from stem cells?
Not only that but organoids are also used in personalised medicine and disease modelling. Although, some of the personalised medicine studies are now moving to the use of patient terminally differentiated cells. And disease mechanism studies rely more on adult stem cells instead as IPSC only give you embryonic/feotal organoids.
The value of IPSCs for organoid research is really in development and aging.
Yamanaka factors also lead to development of reversing the age of the cell to age 0 without turning it into a pluripotent stem cell. This means we can now reverse aging the problem is safety trials as well as a delivery system. we do not know how to deliver yamanaka factors into so many different types of cells. First human trials should be finished in 2 years (restoring sight to the blind) comment if you'd like to know more!
I would really really like to know more.
I would also like to know more! Do you have links to any papers?
The whole giving you cancer thing is certainly one of the main downsides! That and the spectrum of dosage, since it inevitably wont be taken up evenly.
This statement just feels generalized to the point it loses most accuracy. No cell cam be “turned to age 0” (not even the iPSCs) ‘cuz any living cell continues to accumulate random, spontaneous mutations. Without the ability to somehow reverse those, you will always just keep producing less and less functional (maybe even cancerous at some point) cells.
The way nature circumvents the problem is summarized in the concept of natural selection (so basically, nature doesn’t solve anything really). Accumulating, disadvantageous mutations will naturally be selected against either biological (failure to complete embryonic development) or ecologically (reduced fitness). This principle works as it applies to an entire population and doesn’t work on an individual level
You are right that delivery of Yamanaka factors into cells will be a challenge, although the recent Covid-19 vaccines represent a major advancement in delivery of mRNA to cells using lipid nanoparticles.
Literally studying for a stem cell biology exam on Monday. I guess this is my sign to get back to studying.
Cool video!
Hope the best for you. Good luck.
Good luck on that test!!
You got this! Good luck ❤
After studying come back and think of this and ask how it works in starfish - which seem to be able to rebuild from a start 0.1
One week until Thanksgiving break (if you live in the States).
It's cool that I've been watching scishow for a decade, both in the classroom and in my adult life. The fun approach to topics is always refreshing. There's an object positivity that seems to cloud out the real world for a few brief minutes.
One point of critique though: SciShow seems be allergic to pauses.
Do the editors think we all have ADHD? We don't.
I will never understand why this type of editing was chosen.
Great video! One of the things you didn’t mention is although the iPSC themselves aren’t used for many approved therapies, there are many iPSC DERIVED cell therapies in the clinic and in trials such as immune cell transplants to treat cancer. These offer huge off the shelf potential even if it’s not the iPSC themselves but the differentiated cell lineage
Yes agreed, there is still good potential for iPSC-derived cell therapy in the future, so I slightly disagree with the pessimistic outlook of this video. For example, there is now a clinical trial for treating Type I Diabetes with iPSC-derived pancreatic beta cells "off the shelf". (For more info, search ViaCyte). These cells are genetically modified to evade the host immune system, as MHC genes have been deleted by CRISPR. From the FDA's standpoint, iPSC-derived cells are risky because they may be contaminated with undifferentiated iPSCs, which are known to cause cancerous teratomas in mice. In recent years, techniques have been developed to solve this problem by killing off, sorting out, or culturing away the undifferentiated iPSCs before injecting the cells into the patient. However, it is difficult to be absolutely sure that every last undifferentiated iPSC has been removed from the cells, when only one single iPSC cell may be enough to cause cancer in the patient. I think that it is only a matter of time before these techniques are advanced enough to convince the FDA to routinely approve iPSC-based therapies, but the question is, "how long?"
Really really hope we can grow new healthy tissue for living beings soon. The kind of he if it that could have for stroke victims and all other sorts of ailments would be unreal.
They are growing vascularized organoids in laboratories right now, although they are not full-sized organs. One promising technique is to obtain an animal organ, kill off all the animal cells, and have iPSC-derived human cells repopulate the extracellular matrix which serves as a 3D scaffold for the cells to grow. Yet another interesting technique is the 3D printing of cells using a biological 3D printer. Replacing old tissue in the patient with young tissue would probably go a long way toward extending human lifespan.
I wonder if if they can grow organs from the patient's stemcells it means that they would no longer need immunosuppressants since their body would hopefully not reject it, which would mean they aren't so at risk for diseases. I really hope so!
@@neuswoesje590 That is absolutely correct, and that is one reason why there is so much excitement around iPSCs. Organs and tissues made from a patient's own cells are not rejected by the patient's immune system because the cells of the organ/tissue will display proteins (i.e. MHC and other proteins) on the cell surface. The immune cells (i.e. T cells and natural killer cells) will recognize those proteins as "self" and regard the cells as friendly. The other reason why iPSCs are exciting is because they can divide endlessly, so it is possible to make as many iPSC-derived cells, tissues, and organs as needed by the patient. This has the potential to revolutionize the organ transplant industry, and maybe allow us to live longer, more productive lives. However, iPSCs have an important drawback. iPSCs carry a high risk of forming cancerous teratomas when injected into an animal host. Cell therapies and organs/tissues based on iPSCs always carry the risk that some undifferentiated iPSCs may remain in the cells, organs, or tissues to be transplanted into the patient, thus exposing the patient to cancer risk. On the other hand, adult pluripotent stem cells such as VSELs and Muse cells do not form cancerous teratomas and do not carry any cancer risk. Like iPSCs, they are obtained from the patient, carry the patient's DNA, are recognized as friendly by the patient's immune system, are pluripotent, and can differentiate into any cell type. Some adult pluripotent stem cells have demonstrated practically limitless number of cell divisions [Ref: Henry E. Young, Asa C. Black, "Adult-derived stem cells" 2005. Cancer Gene Mechanisms And Gene Therapy]. Furthermore, when adult pluripotent stem cells are injected intravenously into the patient or animal host, the cells automatically migrate to areas of damage in the body, and then differentiate and engraft into the tissue at a high level of efficiency (typically greater than 20%). Thus, repair is long-term, as opposed to the short-term effects of other types of cell therapy such as MSC therapy. Muse cells are now in clinical trials in Japan.
See August Dunning's Phoenix Protocol for activating the stem cells in our marrow. Worth a look.
Grow it´s easy. Stop the growing is the problem.
Would be nice to see this advance more in nerves and skin regeneration. Burnt my eyelids off years ago and still waitin to get new eyelids to progress towards getting my eyesight back.
Although we don't have a lot of clinical trials using iPSCs, we do have an considerable number of stem cell teraphie studies (both in human and rodents). Lately, a lot of progress has been made to study the use of extracellular vesicles released from these stem cells as therapy source. They have the benefit of not being able to mutate after injection. There's a lot to say about that (trust me I know, I work in a lab that study the use of those for stroke therapy), but I dare to say that future is promising (even if expensive at the begging)
There are some developments you might have missed, we have successfully grown (mini) human eyes, there are a relatively new class of polymer gels that have promising futures for neuron regeneration, and if I recall correctly there have been advances in specifically optical implants but with the guy who has the flashlight prosthetic I can't find the articles for the last one, sorry
@@ConstantChaos1 From my research there was the argus 2/orion sight implant that flashes in your eye that I will take a hard pass on right now. for the growth of eyes, the only thing I have found on that over the years is just the front part of the eye, I think it is called the cornea, the front clear portion of your eye. that is cool and all and have had 3 cornia transplants when I had molten metal explode in my eyes but since I burnt off my eyelids and nerves, no doctor/surgeon wants to ouch me right now. The worst part is supposedly boston eye and ear has a procedure in a procedure called cornial plastisis. More specifically, caraded plastisis tyep 2. sry for that spelling, not sure how to properly spell that but that is as far as I can find so far even though I lost my eyesight 7 yrs ago, there still sin't much of tech or willing individuals to help get my eyesight back.
First off, my condolences for the loss of your sight and eyelids. Secondly, how tf did that happen? If you don’t mind sharing of course.
@@peggedyourdad9560 well I do have a video on my channel by to give you briefly. I was trying to build a business creating trinkets out of molten metal. The molten metal blew up in my face one day after accidentally capturing some water underneath the molten aluminum. Some got my eyes salmon got my mouth some got on my chest.
My lab has used iPSCs (and the cells we turn them into) from multiple sclerosis patients to try to figure out what's going wrong in the MS brain. Love seeing them be talked about more!
This also has tie-ins to cancer researcher Given that cancer is basically just stem cells running amuck, and there is evidence that the same process that causes stem cells to specialize into a given cell type can cause cancer cells to revert back to being normal cells.
Recently, studies have shown that cancer cells can be converted back into normal cells, and even differentiate, by inhibiting certain ion channels (e.g. potassium ion channels) in their plasma membrane. Because this effect is seen in a wide variety of ion channels, there is a hypothesis that electric membrane potential (i.e. voltage across the membrane) may drive cancer. Cancer cells are known to be electrically different than normal cells. Interestingly, after ion channel inhibition, the effect seems to be permanent and long-lasting. This indicates that the long-term state of the cancer cell has changed upon ion channel inhibition. In addition, ion channel inhibition may be relatively non-toxic to normal cells, at least compared to existing chemotherapy drugs. Aged and/or senescent cells also seem to have abnormal electric membrane potential compared to normal or young cells, and it would be interesting to see whether ion channel inhibition might provide a long-term, anti-aging effect on aged tissues. For more info, search Michael Levin and "cancer". He is also on UA-cam.
Great script writing for this video! Very easy to follow and great the information! Loved this video :)
International treaties: "You can't use (>14 days old) embryos for research."
Scientists: "Fine, we'll use IPSC clones instead."
Slowly but surely we're making progress. It's hard to focus on the good things sometimes, but we do them and it's good to see it
Great show. Fascinating insights into the unexpected applications of research and why we should never lose hope. Also, Rose Bear's voice is much more pleasing to listen to rather than the yelling of Hank Green!
I teach biology and we cover iPSCs in class. Thanks for videos like this with updated information related to stuff in textbooks.
Awesome advancements. 🙌
Patrick Riordan's clinic in Panama has been treating patients with considerable success. Also there's a clinic in Boca Raton cultivating patients' stem cell.
Don't worry I'm just going to sit here with optic nerve damage for the next few decades until someone finally decides we actually need stem cell therapy.
Glaucoma?
@@dr.ukisensei1599 no
Should find out if x39 patches can work for you
What about the research which shows using 3/4ths of the yamanaka factors (very specific ones) to reverse aging without causing cancer?
Love this channel 🤩
Have they had any news on stem>germ/sperm cells yet? I remember following a doctor in California researching and developing this 10-15 years ago.
Check out the company Conception based out of Berkeley CA
Yay! I feel like I haven't seen a Rose video in ages and I really like her
I feel like you watch these for the wrong reasons.
@@emmettturner9452 i watch scishow to fall asleep at night before waking up on a two hour long symposium for medieval literature like everybody else thanks
The main issue why ipsc is found to have more mutations is because
1. Cells that are reprogrammed may already contained some levels of mutations that is carried forward after it is reprogrammed.
2. Most reprogramming methods involved integration of extra genetic materials that knocks in the genes randomly, causes random mutations to occur.
It’d be a good idea to monitor and often sequence the genome to monitor these mutations from occurring. In a preventive effort, may need to use a non-integrating methods in ipsc generation. But of course currently it’s not that efficient, maybe the next person to produce a mutation-free ipsc might get a nobel prize 🤷🏻♂️
Wow we just got one of the building blocks for some sifi level technology. In a couple generations we'll be doing some crazy stuff.
It sounds like anything is possible, including the potential of turning a cherry from a living plant into a living and talking being, even if it means that'd going to be a hybrid of a plant that produces cherries. You can say that it's impossible, however, All we need is something new to explore. Maybe that cherry would have something we don't
Stem cell therapy could pay for the way to advance regenerative medicine now, if only there is more funding for this research decades ago.
I really hope we can regenerate the retina in humans like in mice. In general we need nerve repairs. So many people with chronic pain and getting addicted to pills and going on disability.
Glad I'm still relatively Young, to take advantage of this new future technology.
I remember when I read the Yamanaka paper back in the days. First thing I thought was: that's a Nobel prize, right there!
Anyway, I foresee the same happening for CRISPR as therapy
Rose is honestly my favourite scishow presenter.
That's how discoveries work. Not "I found it." But:"What the..?"
Omg I made that sorting timelapse video in the Guye et al. paper years ago! It was crazy to see that here on SciShow!
How they can stop growing??? This is the most important question.
Advances now have so many required safeguards that the time to take scientific discovery to consumer products is ridiculous. An old writer (maybe Shakespeare?) suggested executing all baristers. That might be a net positive for humanity.
The mesangial cells in the glomerulus is an aspect I didn't know about.
And also: the original attempt to generate specific cell types (retinal cells, etc) is stalled, not stoped. We may yet get there!
I'm curious if it would be easier to grow the new organ in the recipient, rather than in a pig or other animal.
Good guy Dr. Yamanaka, passing up the opportunity to become Spiderman's next supervillain to research human embryonic development.
Their true value is the friends they made along the way.
Peter: WHY AREN’T WE FUNDING THIS!?
Woohoo 🙌 science.
That's exactly what I was thinking!
I like the fact that they cance a study of untested theraputics when the evidence shows injury because of their use. Too bad this principal is not used for all treatments including those granted emergency use authorization.
Interestingly enough I was once told by a retired Nurse I respected that there is another place labs could get stem cells other than embryos. She told me that if they could harvest the placenta after birth they could use that to obtain stem cells. Not quite sure how that would work but it seems that if she was right this could enable more stem cell research.
There's a good bit of noise in the audio of this video, not sure if anyone else noticed that. Regardless, fascinating!
Can't wait until they figure out the pancreas cause I need a new one
If one could cure a person's parkinson, but it carried a high risk of cancer, would it be worth it?
Hey, guys! Science 2 just dropped! 😂
My guess is that mutations in those cells are normal in the absence of an immune system. The immune system might help destroy mutant cells.
As someone in the field, there is so much more to this story that was missed - it might even 'reverse aging'.
Epigenetic reprogramming can be applied in live animals to partly 'reverse aging', which has been shown by top labs (e.g. Belmonte, Serrano, Sinclair) in multiple different organs. Altos labs recently got $3B funding from people like Bezos, likely the largest startup raise in history, just to advance this research.
This technique is specifically known as partial epigenetic reprogramming, which unlike 'full' reprogramming, aims to rejuvenate adult cells without taking them back all the way to stem cells (which would become a tumor). Not only does this have the potential to reverse age-related diseases like glaucoma or Alzheimer's, it might also treat genetic orphan diseases like progeria.
I wonder if this could be an entirely separate video? Because it seems like there’s a lot going on to the point where it would warrant that.
I don't even care about reversing aging, this sounds like it has the potential to cure so many currently untreatable diseases like arthritis and neuro-degeneration. I hope I see it in my lifetime.
Have you done a pod cast on stem cells and focussed ultrasound and the BBB 3:38
Colombia has an active stem cell research facility and they still help people with chronic pain gain some sort of normal life.
Stem cells aren't wrong, people's feelings just tend to ruin what could possibly be a step towards a disease free world.
They used their own 🧬 that sounds like a villain origin story in the making. 😂
It's mind blowing that you can take some skin cells and turn them into quasi stem cells
The more I learn about human biology the more cells remind me of people and our bodies remind me of countries.
Something about a pig with human organs feels wrong... What if someone were to eat the pig? Though I think it's just the idea of a pig being opened up for human organs that seems disturbing for the most part.
After the multiple fraudulent research discoveries in the field of study I’m glad it is still around.
A weird take on iPSC research, because literally everyone predicted they would first be useful for basic research. Apart from people raising funds for their start-ups, everyone also knew most of the first clinical trials would fail.
That's just statistically what happens with new technology in biology, and there were concerns very early on that iPSC weren't equivalent to normal PSC, and that the yield is just too low. I don't the hype for iPSC has ever died down, and many cell biologists concerned with medical applications are still working on making it work, either by optimisation of the methods, or combining it with other ideas.
What was the show she made a reference to?
Go Go Sci Show!
What was the part that failed?
We need to make an OCEAN of embryonic stem cells. Get to work, scientific geniuses! ☺
Hard to explain but it looks like my migraines
Wait, so dopamine production and Parkinson's are related? So does that mean cigarettes delay the onset of Parkinson's by triggering the reward center of the brain? That could mean early diagnosis for Parkinson's by utilizing GABA, Gamma Amino Butyric Acid, which interferes with reward in regards to addictions. Also could mean treatment options for Parkinson's patients with dopamine infusions, or stimulus. That is something!
Sounds like we need a Dr Moreau....
"ERROR: Task failed successfully"
"This has allowed researchers to create embryo-like structures that mimic human development"
Sweet, man made horrors beyond my understanding...
I usually predict the TV shows
Doesn’t ‘Yamanaka factors’ sound like something from a sci fi movie !
I could imagine if you can get this to infect only scar tissue, how good this would be. Or scary depending upon how you look at it.
sounds dangerous
So we got so close to a near unlimited, rejection-response immune supply of stem cells and fate was like 'naw lol'. COME ONNN
Wait... so we can make slightly mutated clones using ipscs?
Is she shooting this outside?
My mom works with IPSC's.
I'm hearing a lot of parallels with how cancer works. But it's definetly a breakthrough for science and useful tool for research.
Huh? With what this can do, many of us just might be alive when growing (3d printing) organs is common place.
That’s awesome news
Can it treat hypoxic brain injuury
Cool.
Well I wouldn't be so sure...
I can just imagine people using this to do body mods, growing additional body parts just for the fun of it... :S
I thing dna coding systems should be integrated/shncronised with c9mputers, so the subsystems can be handled by object orientated/libraty based automated subsystems therefore awerage human mind cancontrol that modifications. Otherwise its far more complex then one human mind can control/imagine ;)
2:26 aight let's fix my buggered thumb
Now I can get longer tendon
Although how much does this cost
man, shinya yamanaka has definitely been using his stem cells on himself. he's 60 but looks 40
Just dig little deeper with the timeline you will see what’s wrong
can ipsc be used to create a new born?
I cant imagine calculating the derivative of a stem cell
Sci-fi comment incoming:
So if we can create 2 week old embryo cells from a grown man. We're just one human incubator away from cloning? 😳
Sounded like that to me ... but she did say "structures LIKE an embryo". Embryonic development is megacomplex, subtle, and badly understood.
So, no ... (but in the long run maybe yes?).
@@CL-go2ji Yeah, never say never. Whenever we can, will be a huge deal for science. Ethically though, it's effing messed up 🙈
We're still so far off from having practical applications out in the wild that can achieve mass adoption as a proven medical procedure, but god I am hopeful. We probably won't see anything like that for like 10-20 years, but that's just a wild guess.
Where she get her earrings?!
Open source the research, we can’t let you know who from locking everyone else off from immortality and selling it for a ridiculous price
We just ignore the "Nervous Cell"?
SciShow the show allergic to pauses. You think we all have ADHD? We don't.
I will never understand why you chose this type of editing.
Neat
yoooo thats cool
So... If you make ipscs out of yourself and start that development process that turns it into a fetus and it becomes a baby.
Is that you?
Or is it your baby?
Stem cells are not as patentable as drugs. Keep that in mind when reading studies or trials involving them.
Not a serious criticism, but at least on my device the start of this video sounds a bit staticy
Please let us cure the “permanent” scars on our skin 🙏