This is very cool. Researchers at the Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute have succeeded in inserting micro-sized particles of iron into stem cells and then using a magnet to direct the stem cells into a heart in a possible treatment for heart attacks.
The study is published today online by Circulation Research, a scientific journal of the American Heart Association.
The iron-laden cells were injected into rats with a heart attack and then the doctors used a toy magnet placed externally above the heart to guide the cells to the heart.
For the full story, click here.
24 thoughts on “Study: Magnet Used To Guide Iron-Laden Stem Cells to Heart”
I thought you were a libertarian? Isnt that live and let live?
So you honestly think there are women out there who would say “I wasn’t originally going to get an abortion, but since I can justify it in terms of stem cell research I think I will. Yay!”? Further more, I’d suggest that saying “This mode of thought, you know the one that led to increases in your standard of living, and length of your life, is just an evil plot. Don’t worry, I stand firmly against it,” isn’t a great selling point.
About that promising adult stem cell research that has been ignored? Most stem cell research in the U.S. has been done on adult stem cells. Let me repeat that; most stem cell research in the U.S. has been done on adult stem cells. Meaning, you’re flat out wrong that it’s been ignored.
But hey, why should you let facts get in the way of a good self righteous rant?
“Christians once rejected science too, so we can do it as well. This, of course, admits that I’m right about the scientific frauds perpetrated by the left as you are comparing their rejection of evidence with the Christians rejecting of it in the past.”
Once rejected? Once rejected … you still do and your words prove it. Intelligent Design. Young Earth. And all the other religious grasping at straws to preserve some semblance of credibility. I admit nothing about your argument since it just more First Century nonsense. As the purveyor of outlandish claims with no basis besides some stories in a magic book, the burden of extraordinary proof rests with you. I’ll get my popcorn while you rehash the same sophistry that everyone with a Biblical worldview has spewed, in varying degrees of articulation: ad populum arguments, mis-characterizations, outright deception, etc., etc.
Your list of scientists with religious backgrounds is about as useful as a list of persons with noses since most everyone at the time was affiliated with some Church due to the enormous social and financial pressure to be so. (I do notice no description of exactly what variety of Christianity each believed–as if that matters in the argument). Thankfully due to the clash of modernity against religious stupidity that bit of historical bondage is substantially weakened. If you want a list of scientists who reject fairy tales, I am happy to oblige but it doesn’t advance the debate one iota to engage in ad populum arguments.
Nice try though. It’s good to find a fundie who can spell and acknowledge history unfettered by “thee”s and “thou”s. But I do wonder what tired you out so, since, like most fundies, you rely on others (usually with dubious degrees from dubious institutions) to write and think for you. Show me God, indeed!
mespo: Your response sounds like a 5 year old crying to mommy that Jimmy did it so you did it too. That rationale goes something like this: well, Christians once rejected science too, so we can do it as well. This, of course, admits that I’m right about the scientific frauds perpetrated by the left as you are comparing their rejection of evidence with the Christians rejecting of it in the past.
So thanks for confirming my point. Christians adore science.
Great God-fearing scientists of the past (seeing that you had to go back to the Dark Ages to justify modern scientific hoaxes)*
Louis Agassie—father of glacial science 1807-1873
William Foxwell Albright–foremost archaeologist..20th Century
Charles Baggage–creator of the computer 1792-1871
Francis Bacon–father of the scientific method 1561-1626
Roger Bacon–forerunner of the scientific method 1214-1293
John Bartram–first American botanist 1699-1777
Sir Charles Bell–first to extensively map the brain and nervous system 1774-1842
Robert Boyle–chief founder of modern chemistry 1635-1703
George Washington Carver–America’s most prominent agricultural researcher and developer 1864-1943
Georges Cuvier–founder of the studies of paleontology and comparative anatomy 1769-1832
John Dalton–father of modern atomic theory 1776-1844
Rene Descartes–greatest French philosopher, inventor of analytic geometry 1596-1650
Jean Henri Fabre-chief founder of modern entomology 1823-1915
Michael Faraday-discoverer of electromagnetic induction and founder of electromagnetic field theory
oh, the list is too long, but more God-fearing scientists:
John Flamsteed (astronomy), John Ambrose Fleming (the diode), Nehemiah Grew (plant anatomy,co-founder), Stephen Hales (physics and biology), Joseph Henry (self-induction), Sir William Hershel (discovered Uranus), Sir William Huggins (star velocities and composition), James Joule (1st Law of Thermodynamics), Kelvin, William Thomson (2nd Law of Thermodynamics, Johannes Kepler (planetary motion), John Kidd (synthetics), Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnitz (co-inventor calculus), Linnaeus (father of taxonomy), Joseph Lister (antiseptic surgery), James Clerk Maxwell (electromagnetic theory of light, Gregor Mendel (genetics), John Mitchell (father of seismology; predictor of black holes), Samuel Morse (telegraph) Isaac Newt (universal law of gravitation)
Cripes….I’m exhausted and there are so many more.
The truth is that the only reason anyone believes Christians hate science is because of the slanderous hoax perpetrated by left-wingers, god-haters, Christian-haters, and their pathetic liars in the leftist controlled media for the last fifty years.
Christians rejoice in discovering how God created this awesome life (contrary to the lies spread by their hateful enemies).
And they always will.
*(Show Me God, Fred Heeren, beginning page 268)
Comments are closed.