MOTHER JONES BY E-MAIL

«--Previous Post | Blog Index | Next Post--»

Dead Hearts Beat Again, Thanks to Science

Heart500.jpg Scientists at the University of Minnesota have combined young cells with dead hearts to make...new hearts. Yes, that's right sci-fi fans: They grew a new, living, beating heart right there in their lab.

How they did it: Researchers used new heart cells from baby rats and combined them with the valves and "outer structure" of an adult rat's dead heart. In two weeks, "the cells formed a new beating heart that conducted electrical impulses and pumped a small amount of blood," reported the New York Times. As the scientists detailed in Nature Medicine yesterday, the newly created hearts were implanted in other rats, and were not rejected. The process, called "whole organ recellularization," could be done with virtually any organ, said researcher Doris Taylor.

Heart disease is a leading cause of death in our country. Currently, there are about 3,000 people waiting for donor hearts and 550,000 people are diagnosed with heart disease each year. Even for those lucky enough to get a donor heart, the surgery provides no guarantee that their body won't reject the organ. The new process reduces risk of rejection and actually increases the chance that the body will grow new blood vessels and muscles on the implanted heart. So the discovery that we may be able to some day re-grow our own hearts for implantation is encouraging, to say the least. If this kind of procedure were to be used in humans (and scientists involved in the experiment emphasize that that's about 10 years away), stem cells from the patient's own bone marrow would be injected into a specially prepared heart-like structure made from cadaver parts.

But if we ever have the ready option of organ replacement, will we live our lives differently? Will we eat hamburgers and cheesecake in abandon, secure in the knowledge that heart #2 is waiting for us in a freezer somewhere? My biggest question, really: Would this therapy be affordable for all, or for like many other medical breakthroughs would only the rich be able to afford it? Which brings us back to reason number 2,360 to support universal healthcare.






Comments

"Would this therapy be affordable for all, or for like many other medical breakthroughs would only the rich be able to afford it? Which brings us back to reason number 2,360 to support universal healthcare."

Extremely well said. Yes, this is yet another reason among so many to support national health care. Universal is not good enough. We need to get the profit incentive out of our care.

I, for one, want to be able to get this if, AND ONLY IF, I really need it. With our present system, I'd likely get this if I can afford it and if my doctor could make a good case why s/he thinks I need it, even if the real reason is just to make the doctor and hospital rich.

(See C-sections for one example of this. Consider that we are now breeding a race of humans that can no longer give birth vaginally because infant heads are getting too big with the dramatic reduction of the selective pressure against larger heads. The reason for all the C-sections? The real reason? Doctors make more.)

We don't need this expensive heart procedures. People do not change their lifestyle. The money can be better spent elsewhere, such as prenatal care. A new physical heart is not important. People need a new heart full of compassion and feeling.

Mr. Scott, C sections are only for the White women(you are right about that race). Mexican women in America have no trouble getting pregnant and giving birth the natural way that is why we give birth to half of all the new babies in America and soon it will be 66%. I have 5 and working on another one, all the natural way.

Posted by: Maria Fernandez on 01/15/08 at 10:25 AM  Respond

Maria,

I disagree that this is a race thing. This is probably a socio-economic-status thing instead. When I said race, I meant a new race, not one of the existing ones. I meant a race of people who are too big-headed at birth for the mother to give birth other than by C-section. I did not mean to imply any racism or any link to any pre-existing race of humans on the planet.

Mr. Scott, your fast talk doesn't fool me. You know that the White race is on its way out,but for the rest of us beautiful Brown, Black and chocolate people,we will out produce you. Just accept your demise.

Posted by: Maria Fernandez on 01/15/08 at 12:21 PM  Respond

I'm both surprised and disappointed by the level of racism and bigotry I'm seeing on MoJo these days.

(tangent)
Maria,

I do accept my demise. I think you need to accept yours as well. The human species is incredibly likely to go extinct within the next couple of hundred years or so. There is not much time left. Breeding like rabbits will be one of the main reasons. Burning fossils fuels will be another.

Humans went through a bottle neck just 70-80,000 years ago where there were just 3-7,000 people on the planet. This means that there is very little genetic diversity in our species. There is no Us and Them. There is only Us. And, we are doomed if we don't realize it.

We're all in this together. We don't have much time to solve our very real issues.
(/tangent)

Mr. Scott, "breeding like rabbits" is what the White racists say about us Mexicans. That's OK Mr. Scott, have your fund before you kind goes in the waste bin of history.

Posted by: Maria Fernandez on 01/15/08 at 4:59 PM  Respond

Maria Racist,

Breeding like rabbits is what I say about humans as a whole. I do not specify any particular race. If you want to make racist statements, that sucks. But, whatever you do, stop trying to put racist words in my mouth. My position is clear. We are all us. We ALL need to stop breeding like rabbits.

Misanthropic, it is a racist statement to say "stop breeding like rabbits" because minorities have more children than EuroAmericans. May be you don't mean to be a racist, but you come across as one, just like the Clintons.

Posted by: Angel on 01/15/08 at 6:31 PM  Respond

ATLANTA (AP) - Bucking the trend in many other wealthy industrialized nations, the United States seems to be experiencing a baby boomlet, reporting the largest number of children born in 45 years. The nearly 4.3 million births in 2006 were mostly due to a bigger population, especially a growing number of Hispanics. Hispanics as a group have higher fertility rates—about 40 percent higher than the U.S. overall

Posted by: Hector on 01/15/08 at 9:55 PM  Respond

Angel,

I word my posts pretty carefully. Please do not infer that which I do not imply. In fact, please do not infer that which I explicitly state that I do not mean.

I simply mean that homo sapiens, all homo sapiens, must take steps to reduce human population. I do not care whether this is religious fanatics attempting to make god happy. I do not care whether the progeny are black, white, brown, green or purple.

The planet simply cannot support the numbers we have now. If we do not reduce our numbers, they will be reduced for us ... and with great pain and suffering. This is not about race, unless we are talking about the human race.

In fact, increase or decrease in population has a lot more to do with whether the nation in question is developed or developing, rather than the race of the people in the nation. It's hard, for example, to consider India a minority when they are 1/6th of the world's population.

So, Angel, I suspect that it is you and Maria projecting your own racism on me. Please stop doing that.

BTW, just as an aside, note that the U.S. is the only developed nation whose population is still increasing. Perhaps this, like health care, religiosity, and violent crime is just one more indicator that the U.S. really isn't a developed nation.

Maria, you can learn from us Chinese, one child per couple. We Chinese are very advanced in this area because we understand the problems of over population. You listen to Scott and practice what he preach.

Posted by: Lucy Lu on 01/17/08 at 7:27 AM  Respond

Post a comment





 

RECENT COMMENTS

FDA Approves Cloned Animals for Store Shelves (9)
barbie oyunları wrote: It's getting to the point where I feel like if my kids are... [more]

Pigs Spared Med School Surgeries (3)
RW wrote: The last set of IRB seminars I sat in on left me with the ... [more]

Let Them Eat Biofuel (5)
Lars, the Viking wrote: Rod, look at history, whenever the economy changes there a... [more]

MoJo Nukes Convo: Judith Lewis Highlights (12)
David Walters wrote: I want to applaud Judith for her sheer honesty in approach... [more]

MoJo Nukes Convo: Stewart Brand's Take (2)
Stewart Brand wrote: Two quotes are right, but I did NOT say the following... ... [more]

Growing Up Nuclear: Author Kelly McMasters Tells Her Story (5)
Barry Wallace wrote: Kelly, No Nukes, et al. I am disappointed none of you hav... [more]

Some Corals Survived A-Bombs, Others Didn't (1)
BlueBerry Pick'n wrote: that is fascinating. I'd never *considered* coral at all.... [more]

Antarctic Sea Ice Increase: Fodder for Global Warming Skeptics? (23)
Ted wrote: Ed in Mt. You are right. America is the Saudi Arabia of Co... [more]

Cheaper, More Reliable Solar? (2)
wiseman wrote: Solar Thermal kicks ass.... [more]

Bush's EPA Pollutes Science (1)
Elydog wrote: What is the American word for "Lysenko"? Do we have a fav... [more]

XML RSS Feed

Powered by
Movable Type 3.33

Jail.org - Inmate Search
Criminal records, instant public records & people search & current court records. www.jail.org

U.S. Public Records Search
Search County & State Court Records, Criminal records, Vital and Adoption Records www.PublicRecordsInfo.com

Records.com - People Search
Public Records and Background Checks. Instantly Search Criminal Records, Addresses and Court Records www.Records.com

Court Records & County Records
Find Instant Public Records, Criminal Records as Well as County Property Records Search. www.PublicRecordsIndex.com

















bookIN PRINT

CLICK HERE
for more great reading

headphones IN TUNE
New music every issue

CLICK TO LISTEN


This article has been made possible by the Foundation for National Progress, the Investigative Fund of Mother Jones, and gifts from generous readers like you.

© 2008 The Foundation for National Progress

About Us   Support Us   Advertise   Ad Policy   Privacy Policy   Contact Us   Subscribe   RSS