Adult stem treatment for dogs

[sp1d3rdan]

Animals including horses, dogs, and cats are now getting stem cell treatments for as little as 2 to 3000 dollars per treatment. This process includes extraction of the stem cells from their fat tissue.

When are humans going to get the same treatments? It's been used in horses for 4 years now for orthopedic injuries. How long does it take to translate this to humans in this country? I for one am sad that other countries and other living beings are getting better treatments than we are. Yet our country discovered stem cells first.

http://www.oregonlive.com/science/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/science/119258255113790.xml&coll=7

 

[TheBaron]

Plain and simply disgusting. The same has been happening in the UK. Is this civilisation where a dog is held on a higher level than a human being!

Even if the technology is in its infancy - using it on dogs in such a blatantly public manner shows the safety of these procedures when done properly by real and genuine doctors.

Why not go on a nationwide clinical trial? If the state is worried about being sued by those who deem they should at a later date, then disclaimers and contracts of assuming risk and responsibility can be made.

Would it not be better for the government to regulate this and offer it as an experimental treatment at $3000 and have that money directed into the research to continue refining the therapy rather than leave people exposed to some with only money in their head rather than helping people out? For those with degenerative diseases who might be living like a person on death row this should be allowed under supervision and monitoring as well as documentation.

If it is safe for dogs and horses it is safe for humans. Is it not on animals that official research starts on before going into clinical trials? So why allow the charade of people flying to far and flung places like China or driven over the border to Mexico?

Or am I plain and simply naive?

 

[barbara]

Why not humans who are willing?

Isn't that the truth! Also, the Stem Enhance product is made for equine, feline and canine so it is obvious that stem cell treatments of varying kinds are available for these critters. I have no clue why we need to remain in the dark ages, funding studies with rodents that take years to accomplish what is already known. It is ridiculous and a total waste of money and lives. Thank heavens that most of us can travel and take advantage of countries who are more progressive. I think everyone would have to ask why Fido or Fifi can go get helped and their caretakers can't legally. Absolutely pathetic in my mind.

 

[rosech44]

stem cells for animal

Now that irritates me, I am only 89 miles from Portland----I could have taken some of my fat, OF WHICH I HAVE PLENTY--- sent it to them, got my injection and saved my self thousands of dollars!!!!

ONLY IN AMERICA!!!!!

Rose

 

[barbara]

Rose is too funny

Rose - You're a riot. It does frost you though doesn't it? I have kept the 16 pounds off that I lost after my treatment. I attribute it to my newfound energy and also the stem cell diet. I think you will see some results too once you start breathing better. It just takes time. I wish it was an overnight treatment, but I am grateful there is any treatment. A year or two ago, there was no hope, so I guess I had better not do any complaining.

 

[sp1d3rdan]

well hopefully stem cell therapy will be used very very soon.

Apparently this plastic surgeon plans on using stem cells and fat to do breast augmentation this year. It seems that once we are paying out of our pocket for cosmetic reasons we can get whatever we want.

When it comes to saving lives or curing disease it is much more difficult to get things done. Strange that cosmetic applications may be the first soft tissue treatment in the U.S. that is available using stem cells.

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/regional/general/view.bg?articleid=1037970

 

[hlichten]

Government COULD regulate such things in England or Canada under socialized medicine, but not currently in the USA.

While we are waiting for the legislation to kick in, perhaps a hip replacement for your poodle?

Harv

Plain and simply disgusting. The same has been happening in the UK. Is this civilisation where a dog is held on a higher level than a human being!

Even if the technology is in its infancy - using it on dogs in such a blatantly public manner shows the safety of these procedures when done properly by real and genuine doctors.

Why not go on a nationwide clinical trial? If the state is worried about being sued by those who deem they should at a later date, then disclaimers and contracts of assuming risk and responsibility can be made.

Would it not be better for the government to regulate this and offer it as an experimental treatment at $3000 and have that money directed into the research to continue refining the therapy rather than leave people exposed to some with only money in their head rather than helping people out? For those with degenerative diseases who might be living like a person on death row this should be allowed under supervision and monitoring as well as documentation.

If it is safe for dogs and horses it is safe for humans. Is it not on animals that official research starts on before going into clinical trials? So why allow the charade of people flying to far and flung places like China or driven over the border to Mexico?

Or am I plain and simply naive?

 

[sp1d3rdan]

I think I'm going to go to my vet in a dog costume. He could then extract my fat and send it to vet-stem and give me treatment for less then $3000.

This is racism or speci-ism.

 

[hlichten]

Bottom line:
It is far easier to get veterinary treatments approved for use on animals than to get FDA or such approval for use on humans for any treatment for any condition, stem cells or otherwise.

That doesn't mean that feet aren't being dragged when it comes to stem cells and humans....they are, but it is always going to take longer to anything to be approved for human use. Randomized, double-blind studies, and peer-reviewed publications are not necessary in the treatment of horses, dogs and cats. There are also a lot of products used on pets that are unsafe, bad products, where further testing would have prevented their sale.

This has nothing to do with the expensive treatments for pets, which I personally strongly oppose. However, if someone has money, and wants to spend thousands on the treatment of a pet, that can't be regulated in a free society.

Harv

I think I'm going to go to my vet in a dog costume. He could then extract my fat and send it to vet-stem and give me treatment for less then $3000.

This is racism or speci-ism.

 

[sp1d3rdan]

I agree that there are a lot more safety measures in place for humans. But I can't imagine that they've been using it on horses for over 4 years without allow humans that are in some cases dying.

They've allowed much more dangerous drugs to be tested much more quickly in this country. I believe that the drug companies have something to do with this languishing technology. I understand that it is difficult for drug companies to patent the use of any stem cell technology so they are slowing the process. Not to mention the government is not helping the process.

 

[Technocracy]

Let's also not forget just how large the Pet and Pet Care industry is in many countries.

In the United States alone it is Billions of Dollars a year. You can even purchase health insurance for your pet to help pay future veterinary bills. (This coverage is not cheap either.)

To many childless people, they consider that their pets ARE their children and they spend money on them accordingly. Many of us have seen the stories about the pet owner that dies and leaves the majority of their estate to their pets. Even ahead of their own children in some cases.

 

[TheBaron]

Let's also not forget just how large the Pet and Pet Care industry is in many countries.

In the United States alone it is Billions of Dollars a year. You can even purchase health insurance for your pet to help pay future veterinary bills. (This coverage is not cheap either.)

To many childless people, they consider that their pets ARE their children and they spend money on them accordingly. Many of us have seen the stories about the pet owner that dies and leaves the majority of their estate to their pets. Even ahead of their own children in some cases.

Yet these are the exception rather than the rule. Furthermore these are individuals who have chosen to spend their money on their pets for whatever the reason.

However is it not the case that it is the government that needs to deregulate an area of medicine such as this to even use on animals in a commercial setting?

The fact that the vet industry in the west is so big and lucrative detracts nothing from the human side of things.

For starters a society that values animals before humans (and that includes the UK) is on a slippery slope - and the only way is down!

Secondly, don't you think that if governments got off their backside and put their focus behind finding these cures there wouldn't be an industry such as the vet one to save lives?

I would go homeless now to see my little boy sorted. What's the use of owning anything when one lacks health and independence?

What needs to happen is for politicians to acquire political will they lost a long time ago, and focus on regenerative medicine and allow a national effort behind on the same scale that there was in the US when Kennedy decided to land on the moon. That's what needs to happen. No imagine key countries in Europe teaming up with the US with the same aim!

A lot of diseases would have certainly been improved in not 100% cured a long time ago if people and country came first to the governments these elect.

 

[Technocracy]

Yet these are the exception rather than the rule. Furthermore these are individuals who have chosen to spend their money on their pets for whatever the reason.

However is it not the case that it is the government that needs to deregulate an area of medicine such as this to even use on animals in a commercial setting?

The fact that the vet industry in the west is so big and lucrative detracts nothing from the human side of things.

For starters a society that values animals before humans (and that includes the UK) is on a slippery slope - and the only way is down!

Secondly, don't you think that if governments got off their backside and put their focus behind finding these cures there wouldn't be an industry such as the vet one to save lives?

I would go homeless now to see my little boy sorted. What's the use of owning anything when one lacks health and independence?

What needs to happen is for politicians to acquire political will they lost a long time ago, and focus on regenerative medicine and allow a national effort behind on the same scale that there was in the US when Kennedy decided to land on the moon. That's what needs to happen. No imagine key countries in Europe teaming up with the US with the same aim!

A lot of diseases would have certainly been improved in not 100% cured a long time ago if people and country came first to the governments these elect.

At least in my experience, the care people devote to their pets is not as much of an exception as you would expect. People in the US, spend an amazing amount of money on pets.


I seems to me that societies in general has had human life and human worth cheapend considerably since the 60s.


An unintended consequence of:

Several decades of violent movies, violent music, cable news and the 24/7 news cycle. Blood and death everywhere with no end to it, over time people become inured to the sight of it to the point where shows dramatizing organize crime and murder are considered mainstream.

Massive government initiatives designed more to lock people into a regulated health plan and keep them there, rather than cure them.

Those are two of the obvious things, there are many more. Some I will not delve into in these forums because they are some of the biggest political hot potatoes of our times.


Every year life gets a little cheaper to people and the value of human life itself gets even lower.

For decades now, the cry from the people has been me...me....me.
Yet at the same time the suicide rate gets higher every year.

Back in the 50s and early to mid 60s, society was about we, not me.

When that letter got inverted it turned all of society upside down with it.


(My opinion - Your mileage may vary)

 

[barbara]

You make some good points Baron. The problem lies in that so many people vote like sheep. They do not understand the consequences of what they are doing. There are laws to cover almost everything. They believe that they have done the right thing in voting in a new law that may cause another person or business to suffer greatly. They don't think things through because the next time, it could happen to them. As far as the pet industry goes, it may be run by much broader minded people who realize that people do love their pets and will pay a lot of money to help them and keep them well. I do not see that this has much to do with the argument about human health care personally, except to moan and groan about the state things are in. If people truly wanted better care and cures, there would be a mass uprising and candidates who felt the same would be elected. Instead, the me attitude is so overpowering that everyone wants to get it all for "free". They don't realize how expensive "free" really is. They have been programmed to think they need drugs from cradle to grave and cure is always just around the corner as millions are raised for charities each year all in the name of some disease. I don't buy into it myself. I think cure is a dirty word to the large pharmaceutical companies and I don't think the charities are far behind. Just my opinion and that's all.

 

[sp1d3rdan]

Cures are bad for big Pharma. After all if they cured most chronic illnesses then there would be billions of drug companies and doctors out of work.

Stem Cell may be a revolution just like the industrial and technology eras. It will put health care and drug companies out. Since they cannot make money off the cures they are not investing in stem cell research. It is then up to government to make the investment and unfortunately they have not done it.

Right now it is more or less private investment from other countries that are driving stem cell breakthroughs. It seems that everyday I read another article on how some researcher at some US university made some discovery that stem cells helps rats with lung disease. They are just duplicating what scientists in Thailand, Mexico, or Russia have already figured out in humans.

I miss the days when American scientists made the breakthroughs and the world followed our lead. Honestly I don't care where cures are discovered as long as they are available to us.

 

[hlichten]

We can only really say that stem cell research has been suppressed and underfunded to this point, the rest of it is up for argument.

Scientists would argue that not enough is known about stem cells yet, which is related to the underfunding also.

Stem cells are not going to cure or aid everything. There are always going to be diseases and ailments for which there is no true cure. Stem cells may be shown to aid some ailments, but not provide an entire cure.

I fully disagree with you. The healthcare industry and the drug industry are in no danger whatsoever from stem cell technology advancement.

We are 3 to 10 years away from stem cell treatments being FDA approved here, and insurance companies are still not going to cover them, at least to begin with.

By then, science will be looking for something new.

Harv

Cures are bad for big Pharma. After all if they cured most chronic illnesses then there would be billions of drug companies and doctors out of work.

Stem Cell may be a revolution just like the industrial and technology eras. It will put health care and drug companies out. Since they cannot make money off the cures they are not investing in stem cell research. It is then up to government to make the investment and unfortunately they have not done it.

 

[sp1d3rdan]

Thanks for your opinion Harv. Naturally there will always be disease and dying. I certainly hope that stem cells cures or treats most of this worlds chronic conditions.

A dose of realism is hard to listen to as we all want to start feeling better right now. I think that in the meantime the stem cell treatments abroad will become more and more reliable before they are offered here in the U.S.

I do disagree that "to much is not known about stem cells" thus there is a lack of funding. Usually if too little is known about something and the potential is there, more funding is provided rather than less. Before Christopher Reeve died, he said, "Before man went to the moon they had the vision and not the technology, now we have the technology but not the vision."

There are more political than technological roadblocks for stem cell researchers in the U.S. Regardless I agree with you. In about 3 years we will see the first round of adult stem cell therapies. I think if those are safe the next round of treatments will be very quickly approved by the FDA. 10 years I suspect there will be more than just a few diseases being treated by stem cells here in the US.

 

[barbara]

Drug companies - Do they want stem cell research?

Harv - I can't agree that drug companies do not feel some threat to their wellbeing when something like this shows so much promise. They cannot patent stem cells, so it is of little interest to them. They would still have millions of users of drugs to work with, but not to the excessive amount that are currently in use. I think it plays a big role. Also, drug companies often sponsor continuing education for doctors. They are not about to give them courses on stem cell therapy. Therefore, many doctors continue in complete oblivion as to what is going on in the stem cell arena. This is true of any alternative medicine in my opinion. Laser, HBOT, acupuncture, stem cells. These things do not involve drugs and therefore very little progress is being made into making them available for patients.

 

[Technocracy]

I agree with Harv but for different reasons.

Government over-regulation does much to stifle private investment in research in this country. That is one factor.

Second factor
Most research grant money comes from one of two sources....

A. Government research grants - many of which won't give you a grant unless the beaurocracy approves of your research focus. Thereby directing the research focus, albiet very poorly.

B. Private grants from industry - industry in this instance mainly being pharmacaeutical companies, health insurance companies, and supporting industry such as chemical companies (Dow Corning for instance). Again the flow of money is being controlled in the research arena, and what the grant givers do not like they do not help fund. This directs research focus just like in item A, however in this case there is more awareness of how things are influenced, even if they cant get along with each other well enough to act in unison on anything



Like the Golden Rule says.....He who has the gold, makes the rules.



I do however believe that the sad state of research in this arena is caused by this.

And further I do not subscribe to or necessarily believe that it is conscious effort on the part of either Government or industry.


To my mind it is far more plausible that beaurocratic incompetence on the part of the government heterodynes very badly with self interest on the part of industry in this instance.

While the results negatively influence research in the bio-technology sector as in the case of stem cell research. By the same token there is not any real return for the government or the industry where the money is being spent. Meaning research that is about as close to wasted as such can be.

If either the government or industry had any direction or ability to manage the research effort there would be some return, even if it was in unexpected directions.

The drug companies are actually missing the boat on this one in some ways. Stem cell therapy, at least at this early stage, will not replace most prescription drug use.

Drug companies could also get in on the vitamin/supplement side of it now and then expand in that direction. Not an insignificant revenue stream in modern society. Especially given the high focus in recent years on diet, exercise, vitamins, supplements, etc.



My position is that I won't attribute clever manipulation to either government or industry that is easily explained by stupidity and incompetence.



As I said, I agree with Harv, but for differing reasons.

 

[barbara]

Tony - Drug companies are already trying to get into the vitamin/supplement business in my opinion by trying to get them regulated by the FDA. I think this would be a real fiasco. I don't think they are pushing this in terms of thinking ahead to things like stem cell research replacing lots of prescribed medicines. I think it is just one more step in the direction of massive greed. We don't need government intervention in every facet of our lives, especially when this intervention may be for the benefit of huge corporations and not the end user.