Fracture Putty Can Heal a Broken Bone In Days

YosemiteSam

YosemiteSam

Unfriendly and Aloof!
Messages
45,858
Reaction score
22,195
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
If we break a bone it can take weeks or even month to heal depending on the type and severity of the break. In some extreme cases the complexity of the fracture can make it impossible to heal properly. Researchers at the University of Georgia Regenerative Bioscience Center have come up with a new solution for healing broken bones that cuts recovery time to days. It relies on the use of stem cells that contain a bone generating protein. These cells are injected in gel form directly into the area of the broken bone, where they quickly get to work forming new bone. The end result is very rapid recovery, possibly sidestepping the muscle atrophy that can come with long bone healing times. The gel has been proven to work on animals as big as a sheep and has funding from the DoD. Lets hope it is proven to work on humans in the coming years.
 
Harry Potter. Remember the bone regrowing tonic? Let's hope this wouldn't be as painful as that was.

It's a great idea. Some people are against stem-cell therapy, but if it works, why not use it? Possibly a political topic, so I won't go there. Just sayin'. I wonder what the long term effects would be and if there are any side effects, the kind the animals can't tell us about. Would the bone regrow to be actually stronger than the natural bone, would it be the same, or would it grow back weaker, like it does the natural regrowth way? I suppose time will tell. We really are living in the midst of those science fiction movies we all loved to watch as kids.
 
people are against embryonic stem cell use, not adult stem cell use...which thus far has proved more reliable for use.
 
kimrose;4411155 said:
Harry Potter. Remember the bone regrowing tonic? Let's hope this wouldn't be as painful as that was.

It's a great idea. Some people are against stem-cell therapy, but if it works, why not use it? Possibly a political topic, so I won't go there. Just sayin'. I wonder what the long term effects would be and if there are any side effects, the kind the animals can't tell us about. Would the bone regrow to be actually stronger than the natural bone, would it be the same, or would it grow back weaker, like it does the natural regrowth way? I suppose time will tell. We really are living in the midst of those science fiction movies we all loved to watch as kids.
Click to expand...

There are two main categories of stem cells, both containing a variety of different types of stem cells... adult stem cells, which I haven't heard anyone against and embryonic stem cells which are the source of controversy...

The article states that they are using mesenchymal stem cells, which are a form of embryonic, so I would imagine this will be controversial in some circles...

Nevertheless, it's very cool technology...
 
trickblue;4411187 said:
There are two main categories of stem cells, both containing a variety of different types of stem cells... adult stem cells, which I haven't heard anyone against and embryonic stem cells which are the source of controversy...

The article states that they are using mesenchymal stem cells, which are a form of embryonic, so I would imagine this will be controversial in some circles...

Nevertheless, it's very cool technology...
Click to expand...

It would be good if we were allowed to have this as an option to the treatments already in place. Yes, it is embryonic, so there will likely be those who oppose.
 
fact is that most of the breakthroughs have come from adult stem cells which very little has come from the others.

And most of this research was forced. The fact is that most of the laboratories and research plants would have taken the easy way and used embyronic cells. Because SUPPOSEDLY that was where the great potential was.

That has been mostly disproven over the last ten years.
 
Didn't Peyton Manning have some kind of stem cell therapy on his neck, over in England or somewhere. It didn't have great results as I recall. My memory is not the greatest any more, maybe they were just discussing the potential of him having the therapy.
 
burmafrd;4411446 said:
fact is that most of the breakthroughs have come from adult stem cells which very little has come from the others.

And most of this research was forced. The fact is that most of the laboratories and research plants would have taken the easy way and used embyronic cells. Because SUPPOSEDLY that was where the great potential was.

That has been mostly disproven over the last ten years.
Click to expand...

If by "disproven" you mean disproportionately underfunded to make any sort of comparison, then I would agree.
 
jwitten82;4411467 said:
Embryonic stem cell research shouldnt be an issue.
Click to expand...


No it should not. But there will always be misinformed people who think babies are being killed just for the stem cells.

And if anyone tells you more breakthroughs have been made in adult stem cells, keep in mind there has been much more money spent in researching adult stem cells because of the so called "controversy" surrounding the embryonic stem cells.

Fascinating technology no doubt.
 
CowboyWay;4411479 said:
No it should not. But there will always be misinformed people who think babies are being killed just for the stem cells.

And if anyone tells you more breakthroughs have been made in adult stem cells, keep in mind there has been much more money spent in researching adult stem cells because of the so called "controversy" surrounding the embryonic stem cells.

Fascinating technology no doubt.
Click to expand...

false

absolutely false

but go on with the bs.

First show any data supporting your claim that more was put into adult.
Second, Europe and elsewhere put BILLIONS into embryonic stem cell research over the last 10 years.
 
Hoofbite;4411477 said:
If by "disproven" you mean disproportionately underfunded to make any sort of comparison, then I would agree.
Click to expand...

you can't prove that because it is false


Only US Government grants were stopped. No one else was stopped.
Billions in the US were put into that research by private people and corporations.

This BS about that is just plain that.
 
burmafrd;4411831 said:
false

absolutely false

but go on with the bs.

First show any data supporting your claim that more was put into adult.
Second, Europe and elsewhere put BILLIONS into embryonic stem cell research over the last 10 years.
Click to expand...

http://report.nih.gov/rcdc/categories/Default.aspx

http://img713.*************/img713/3326/screenshot20120208at541.jpg

That's a little over 700M out of 6.6B that has gone to stem cell research. About 11% of Government funding.

Here's a chart that goes back a little further.

http://img213.*************/img213/809/screenshot20120208at553.jpg
 
burmafrd;4411832 said:
you can't prove that because it is false


Only US Government grants were stopped. No one else was stopped.
Billions in the US were put into that research by private people and corporations.

This BS about that is just plain that.
Click to expand...

And of course you are privy to the amounts that private corporations and people invested?
 
burmafrd;4411853 said:
http://blog.bioethics.net/2007/08/whos-funding-stem-cell-research/


right back at you

Oh and if you look up the wiki page on this you will find that California took out $3 Billion in bonds in 2005 to fund ONLY EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH

And billions have been spent all over the world on EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH

Keep on trying
Click to expand...

Yeah, thats 3 Billion over the course of 10 years.

And keep on trying what? Acknowledging that adult stem cells has been more funded? That's a fact.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 9,054 (members: 32, guests: 9,022)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
464,577
Messages
13,819,758
Members
23,780
Latest member
HoppleSopple
Back
Top