STEM CELLS AND CONTROVERSY

Quilting, early career

The Navajo rug in the background was purchased in Arizona, for a lot of money

Not a good investment, it turned out..

 

 

The little news magazine The Week (“all you need to know about everything that matters”) sometimes almost lives up to its preposterous subtitle.    Take this week (May 31, 2013) for instance.  In only about 240 words they succeeded in educating me, rousing my enthusiasm, and pissing me off.  All at once.  The title of the bit is  “Creating human stem cells by cloning”.  You should read it.

Biological background:  When an egg is fertilized to form a “zygote” it is said to be “totipotent”, which means that it can turn into every kind of cell in the organism, as well as the placenta (in mammals) needed to nurture the embryo.  After a few cell divisions these baby cells become "pluripotent":, they still can turn into any cell in the body, but not the placenta.  As they  continue to divide and multiply they gradually lose “potency”, until at last they can only divide and produce more copies of themselves. 

Unless you live on the moon you will have heard of the controversy over “embryonic stem cells”.  These  are cells in the pluripotent stage (I think).  Heretofore they could only be obtained from living embryos.    In theory they can be used to cure all manner of human maladies, specifically those that result from damaged tissues such as neural cells.  Conceivably they could be used to allow paraplegics walk, cure MS – and lots more things besides.  They aren’t yet proven to be the greatest boon to medicine since sterilization, but they could be.

The trouble, of course, is that, until recently they have to be “harvested” from human embryos.  Lots of people object to this moral grounds and, although I disagree, I understand.

Now, however, there seem to be several clever ways out.. 

The first way out was discovered by two Japanese scientists, Shinya Yamanaka and his student, Kazutoshi Takahashi.   These gentlemen succeeded in turning fully developed (“non potent”) cells back into the equivalent of embryonic stem cells by much fiddling, using four proteins that they laboriously tracked down.  They have a lock on the Noel, even before me.  This work was done in 2006, and you probably have heard of it.

The second way out is described  in The Week.  Scientists at the Oregon Health and Science University (Portland) have done the following.  They have taken a skin cell (fully differentiated; not  ”potent”) from an  8-month-old baby and inserted  into an unfertilized egg that has had its nucleus removed.  The two cells “fuse” (I think this is a reporter talking, not a scientist), resulting in a pluripotent cell.  They then proceeded to clone these cells and use them to form various specialized cells – liver, kidney, heart, ski n, etc.  Damn, another group in line ahead of me.

 

I am speculating here, but I think that both of these methods are especially useful in that they produce cells that are "us", from the standpoint of the rest of the body.  Thus, they have no trouble with immune rejection processes - unlike transplants, for instance.

So, why am I pissed?  Well, the Catholic Church objects.  To quote one Cardinal O’Malley, the research is “immoral”.  “Human cloning treats human beings as products, manufactured to order to suit other peoples’ wishes”, says the Cardinal. 

Okay, I don’t like abortion and I understand why so many people treat it as a terrible sin.  I don’t agree, but I understand.  But if a means exists to use a person’s own cells, together with an unfertilized egg  (unfertilized and thus not a “person”), how can any  rational person object?    What tortuous logic exists to conclude  that God would object to science using a person’s own skin cells to repair his severed spinal column?  Other peoples' wishes are not involved.  No scientist or doctor forces health on you; it's up to you.  I don't get it; where is the sin here?

I may get some replies to his.  Stay tuned.

 

 

 



CHEMO BRAIN AND CROWD SOURCING

Ah, the 60s

The good old days.

 

Yes, I know – you’re getting tired of me always laying  my hands on your wallet.  But, then, again, you always feel so good when you divert some of your money from silly stuff like food, clothing and gas – into ovarian cancer research.  So here is another chance to feel good.

Back on June 14, 2012 I wrote a piece about the physical and mental effects of chemotherapy.  To refresh your memory, some patients recover from chemo to find that they have physical and mental impairment that sticks with them for a long time, in some cases forever.   Add to that the fact that any mortal is bound to worry about recurrence - and you get a lot of people in an unfortunate fix.  Well, I am about to introduce  you to a chance to help do something about this situation.  Fred Hutch, as often is the case, is in the vanguard. 

Look at the following link:  http://igg.me/at/survivorwellness.  This is an experiment in “crowdsourcing”, which I take to involve raising money from the “crowd” (e.g., us) in advance of starting the project.  What these people hope to do is to set up some sort of Web-based program to help survivors of ovarian cancer.  Having watched Linda deal with tingling fingers, inability to easily do her quilting, and occasional forgetfulness, I can attest to the value of this sort of thing.  I gave $25.  Go thou and do likewise.  Or better.  Give it a look.



SAM SIMS: my friend

 

The boys: mostly Caltech freshmen

 Probably Christmas time, 1951

 Sam is the one in the middle, with the red shirt.

 The house is Rancho Sims, in west Indio, CA

 It gave way to I 10  Auto World

 Not exactly progress, in my estimation.

 

You will remember Sam; he was featured in my blog “Why I am not a Biochemist”, published 6/29/12..  Well, he has just died – of something called “soft tissue sarcoma” – cancer, in other words.  He is said to have been his usual cheerful, uncomplaining, appreciative self to the end.  I posted the following on his funeral home’s web page:

I butted heads with Sam in 1949, 50 and 51, playing high school football.  I wrestled with him after dinner nearly every night at Cal Tech.  I visited him in Austin when he was at the U. Texas and I was in the army.  He was the best man at my first wedding.  We hung out together when we both were graduate students at Stanford.  Then I became a college professor on the west coast, while Sam settled on the east coast as a mining geologist.  I did visit  him once; he took me down an abandoned iron mine in Pennsylvania & scared the bejeebers out of me.  Then, for more than 30 years I never saw him.  And now he is gone, leaving behind what sounds like a wonderful family and a good life.  Thirty years notwithstanding, I consider Samuel J. Sims my best friend.     My heart goes out to Myrna and to all her and Sam’s family, none of whom have I ever met.    And in a way it goes out to me, too I had hoped to see Sam in the Southern California desert country where we both grew up.  Who knows, we might even have wrestled a little.  Good life, Sims: too bad you couldn’t hang around a lot longer. 

That makes four people important to me that cancer has taken away in the last few years:  Bob Speed, with whom I worked on many research projects, Richard Levin, my good friend and golf mentor, Linda, my much  adored wife, and now Sam.  Yes, you will say: when you get old your friends and family begin to die, and many of them die of cancer.  That is true, but is hardly a consolation.  More than ever I’m going to use my time, energy and resources to further cancer research.  I only wish I were smart enough and young enough to do a better job. 

 



May 22, 2011

In our hearts forever

On this second anniversary of Linda’s death I can do no better than to repeat what I wrote on May 22, 2011

My beloved companion of 30+ years left today at 4:20 pm.  She had struggled bravely for days, but in the end her going was peaceful and in its way, almost beautiful.  If there is a heaven she is surely there, with the mother she hasn’t seen in five years, and the father she has  missed for over 50 years.  There will be a Celebration of Life but I don’t know when*; you will all be informed.  Hospice House is a wonderful institution.  Your friendship is a great blessing.  Life can be painful, but I guess it’s worth the effort.

As for me now, the pain is still here and as intense as ever, but I have learned  to cope with it.  And I continue to work to the best of my poor ability to hasten, if by only a few hours, that inevitable day when no woman ever again has to suffer what Linda suffered, and no man has to stand by, helpless, and watch his beloved wife die of ovarian cancer, and be powerless to intervene.  

*It was held on July 24^th; about 65 people attended –a small fraction of those who loved her.



SUMMERUN NORTH 2013

Linda and unknown baby.

From the beard, post 1990

From the license plate and trees, maybe Alaska

Pretty surely a parking lot

Did she just snatch a baby from a parked car?

Any ideas?

 

As most of you know, the Marsha Rivkin Center for Ovarian Cancer Research raises a large proportion of its funds by sponsoring a “fun run” in downtown Seattle.  This year the event is to be held on July 21^st; if you would like to know more about it, Google  “Summerun” to get to the MRC web site.  It promises to be a memorable affair; fun, for a worthy cause.

But, just as last year, I won’t be there, although I have entered a team.  Its name is “Linda’s Team”, and it will have no members, if all goes well.  Here is why.

The race starts at 8:30 am.  It is at least two hour to downtown Seattle, even on a Sunday morning.  Parking is available – and will be free, for a few hours.  Nevertheless, in order to get there in time to pick up the race packet and distribute the stuff therein we would have to leave Bellingham by 6:00 am at that latest.    Add to that the fact that most of Linda’s Team will consist of folks only a few years (or decades) younger than me, none of whom  are planning to break the course record.  (I don’t know what it is, but the race is 5 km long.)   So, just as last year, we are planning an alternative event – Summerun North.  Due to a previous engagement it can’t be on July 21^st, so we are going to throw it on July 28^th (a Sunday.)  It will be held at my house, from 10:30 to whenever.  There will be hot dogs and buns, pop and beer, and whatever accompaniments and goodies the participants decide to bring.  The “Run” part of the event will likely be a walk, through Fairhaven or possibly Edgemore. 

(Okay, I know this mostly is a repeat of stuff I wrote in my blog  yesterday.  I just realized it.  Anyway, what follows is new.)

Here is how you donate to Linda’s Team:

1)      Google “Summerun”, then click on “Donate”

2)      Click on the big green square that says “Donate”

3)      Click on Donate to an Individual

4)      Enter “Linda’s Team”

5)      Click “Donate”.  Do not “Join”

6)      Enter credit card # and amount, and fill out the rest of the form.

7)      To finalize the deal you will have to translate one of those drunken letter sequences.  If you can’t do it at first, try, try again.  You’ll get it eventually.  It took me three tries.

So, I hope somebody tries it soon and gets back to me with difficulties, etc.  I actually have a little clout with the MRC people and it is possible that I could get the process simplified.

Oh, there will be T-shirts for purchase.  To find all about that, go to http://www.customink.com/signup/3a9v6j52

Finally:  You can come to Summerun North and not donate, and you can donate and not come to the “Run”, but I hope many of you  do both.  Stay tuned for more exciting developments.

 



 

 

• 

I ADMIT (temporary) DEFEAT

 

 

In our new home, probably a wedding anniversary

 

I wish I could still get into that coat

 

 

Some of you may remember that, on March 3, 2012, I stated that my goal was  to cure ovarian cancer, and win the Nobel Prize in medicine – both before I turned 80.  Well, today is May 13, 2013, my birthday, and I have  fallen somewhat short – although I prefer to see it as postponed victory.  I know personally of two new cases of ovarian cancer, so clearly the beast is still out there.  Moreover, I waited up ‘till midnight for that longed-for phone call from Oslo, and it never came.  So, I am, at least temporarily, a failure – but not, by God, a quitter.  My new goal is to see ovarian cancer confined to the medical history books, and to have that Nobel money to spend, both  before I am 90.  (A typo, which I just corrected said, “before I am 900.”  I hope eradiation doesn’t take that long.) 

So, anyway…  I won’t be going down to Seattle until May 20^th.  When I go I will be helping the Hutch people put together the Research Advocates section of their new NIH proposal, and also the Rivkin people to organize their big fund-raising event, the Summerun.  As before’ we plan to have a Summerun North in Bellingham, for all those people who want to participate and contribute but don’t feel like getting up at 0430 hours for a trip to Seattle, and who furthermore would prefer to walk rather than run.  Current plans are to hold the event at my house and walk either through Fairhaven or Edgemore.  As before there will be a barbeque provided by the host, plus – I hope – all sorts of other edibles contributed by the “contestants”.     Also, as before, as this is a fund raiser I hope to extract a “suggested donation” from each participant – except  Woody, last year’s  winner, who is only five years old and thus is exempt.

The real Summerun, the one in Seattle, is on the 21^st of July.  Due to a scheduling problem I will have to hold our northern version on July 28^th.  As before their will be T-shirts for purchase .   The name of our group will remain “Linda’s Team”.  More details will be reported as we find and overcome them.  Stay tuned.

Oh, and if you want to congratulate me on attaining  the awesome age of 80, you can do one or more of several things:

1)      Send me a funny card.  I already have about two dozen.  I will decide which one is funniest, and feature it in a future blog.

2)      Donate to Linda’s Fred Hutch Tribute:  http://getinvolved.fhcrc.org/goto/lindajoycebeck. 

3)      Tell somebody about my blog, and lie to them about how much you enjoy it.  The purpose of this thing is to reach as many people as possible, and keep them thinking about ovarian cancer research.



THE CANCER GENOME AND ITS USES

In her mobile home, North Lake Samish. 

Waiting for Prince Charming
I doubt if she had me in  mind

The dust from my Cinco de Mayo Cumpleanos Ochenta Celebration finally has settled.  There were about 30 people here, and all seemed to enjoy themselves.  My granddaughters did much of the shopping.  Unfortunately it appears that they are used to feeding marathon runners and weight lifters in their twenties, not a bunch of sedentary city folk  with a median age of about 60.  Thus, you can easily imagine the state of my refrigerator.  Anybody want two quartz of guacamole?  How about four dozen corn tortillas?  IF I can thrive on ground meat, cheese and tequila I will have no need for grocery stores until mid-August, at the earliest.   And by then I may be in Iceland, where I will subsist on shark-fin soup and braised seaweed.  How much weight will I lose, you ask?  Not enough.

So, anyway, I want to report on some new cancer research.  The sharp eyes of Dick Ingwall detected the following and dispatched it to me

http://nyti.ms/ZVI8Zn

From this link you can follow further links to an abundance of information.  I did, and some of it I think I understood.

The topic of this article is how best to classify cancers.  Traditionally they have been subdivided based on the tissue or organ they affect:  ovarian, breast, lung, etc.  Within this broad category tumors are further differentiated by pathologists, who examine slices of tissue under a microscope.  The correct categorization of a tumor can be critical; some therapies work well on some kinds of cancers but not at all on other types.  Mistakes seem to be made rather frequently.  Fortunately, a new and more reliable  (but, I would wager, much more expensive) diagnostic technique involves the determination of precisely which  genes in the tumor are mutated, and how.  This is done using the findings of the  TCGA, which codes for The Cancer Genome Atlas.  TGCA comprises a massive, multi-institutional effort funded by the NIH (yes, that very NIH, the one that our leaders in Washington just hobbled with a substantial  budget cut*.)  The authors involved in these studies seem confident that basing treatment on similarities in cancer genomes is the way to go.  For instance, some kinds of ovarian, breast, colon and lung cancers share similar DNA defects.  Thus, research on breast cancer may reflect on ovarian, and vice versa.     Through my ongoing efforts to wrap my mind around epigenetics I know that genes are not the whole story, but they are a big pary of it.  Thus, I am mildly stoked.  But...

So, okay, this isn’t a cure, I acknowledge.  Incremental progress is fundamentally dissatisfying.    We all want some towering genius to announce: “Oh, cancer?   Why, we can get rid of it THIS way.  Now lets' go onto something more interesting.”   Sorry, ain’t  gonna happen.    We need to keep pecking away .  The ultimate payoff will be well worth the frustration.

*You didn't  complain?  Tut, tut

 



LESS IS MORE, more or less

 On Rhodes, mid 80's

This was a "Stations of the Cross" for a medieval monastery

 

I find the number of important cancer-related articles that are floating  around in the popular press to be remarkable.  Has it always been this way, or am I just paying more attention?  Probably the latter. 

Anyway, the Economist for April 13-19 has one such, an interesting, and blessedly short,  description of research done by  Dr. Meghan Thakur of the Novartis Institute for Biochemical Research.  (Full disclosure: I have a little bit of Novartis s stock – and I wish I had a lot more.)  The article, on p. 81, is entitled Less is More.    Dr. Thakur has discovered that sometimes discontinuing use of a cancer drug  will cause the tumor to shrivel and, one hopes, die.  And there is a good explanation for this, one we all can understand. 

It seems that some drugs do a good job of killing tumor cells the first time they are administered, but eventually their efficacy wears off.  It appears that, if the drug doesn’t kill every last tumor cell, the tumor may return – mutated into a form that is resistant to the drug!  (Talk about bad planning!)  This is illustrated in the article by the drug vermuafenib, used to combat advanced melanoma.   After testing the technique on mice (what would we do without them?), it was tried on 19 patients at a London hospital who were not longer responding to vermuafenib; in 14 the tumor growth slowed.  Unfortunately, the tumors don’t seem to have disappeared, just slowed down.   (That’s progress, I guess, but we could wish for a lot more.)   

The article also has a short, simple explanation of just what is going on, biochemically.  Because I know all of you are eager to absorb more biochemistry, I will let you read it for yourselves.

By the way, I have several more topics to discuss, courtesy of Dick Ingwall, but I will be busy with Cinco de Mayo and other things for the next few days.  If you become restless, re-read some earlier blogs  and write Comments.

.