Can humans regenerate wounds without scarring?

[Jackmannii]

Thank you, Qadgop. Though how you knew I’m board certified is beyond me (Jackmannii sneaks peeks around his office to look for mini-video spy cameras).

As for those links of tgan3, I don’t see any demonstration of cloned organs working in humans (the bladder guy even says in the link “We’re not using any type of stem cell population or cloning techniques”).

[tgan3]

@Qadgop_the_Mercotan

The BBC is not a peer-reviewed, scientific journal. It’s a broadcasting company. And I trust broadcasting companies about as far as I can comfortably spit a rat.

Jackmannii has it right (as usual). There’s no good peer-reviewed evidence-based science out there that indicates that regeneration (or even scarless healing) can be a reality for the vast majority of people in the here and now. Tantalizing hints of possibilities, early breakthroughs, and hopes for the future, yes. But that’s it.

Jackmannii, as a board certified pathologist, does make a credible expert in many such matters related to medical science. As such, I trust him somewhat further than I can spit a rat. Comfortably or uncomfortably.

To QadGop:

Yes Qadgop, I do also believe that not everything the media says is trustable. However, largely it is reliable( we do not live in the era decades ago where news like alien visitors are regularly reported ) and the news of the organ cloning into the animals is not fake, it is real. I do not want to argue on that aspect no more as it would be nitpicking and I know for a simple fact that the news there( the link i gave you ) is 100% real.

[tgan3]

@Jackmannii

Thank you, Qadgop. Though how you knew I’m board certified is beyond me (Jackmannii sneaks peeks around his office to look for mini-video spy cameras).

As for those links of tgan3, I don’t see any demonstration of cloned organs working in humans (the bladder guy even says in the link “We’re not using any type of stem cell population or cloning techniques”).

To Jackmannii:

Hey Jackmannii, I hope there isn’t any animosity between us. Im a peaceful guy that enjoys a friendly heated debate. You can response to me on what you think again.

My response to what you just posted.

Let me ask you what is the point of regenerative medicine?

The main point down here is to grow a working organ and to transplant it into humans and for it to be able to work perfectly. This is what was exactly reported in the link i gave you about the bladder.

"In the new procedure, doctors extract muscle and bladder cells from a small piece of the patient’s own bladder. The cells are grown in a Petri dish, then layered onto a three-dimensional mold shaped like a bladder.

In a few weeks, the cells produce a new bladder, which is implanted into the patient. Within a few more weeks, the new bladder has grown to normal size and has started functioning."

And about Mr Atala saying that he did not use cloning techniques, do you know why cloning is considered unethical? Because simply it invovles using embryos. This site explains it best: http://www.religioustolerance.org/clo_ther.htm

1)Take a woman’s ovum, and remove its DNA. This converts it to a form of human life into what is basically a factory for creating a pre-embryo.

2)Remove the DNA from a cell taken from a human, and inserting it into the ovum.

3)Giving the resulting ovum an electrical shock to start up its embryo making operation. In a small percentage of cases, a pre-embryo will be formed.

4)The pre-embryo is allowed to develop and produce many stem cells. So far, the procedure is identical to that used in adult DNA cloning. However, the pre-embryo is not implanted in a woman’s womb in order to try to produce a pregnancy.

5)Stem cells are removed from the pre-embryo; this results in its death.

6)The stem cells would be encouraged to grow into whatever tissue or organ is needed to treat the patient. Stem cells are a unique form of human cell that can theoretically develop into many organs or body parts the body.

7)The tissue or organ would be transplanted into the patient.

So it involves somesort of taking one’s life to help another. However, if you read Mr Atala’s procedure it just involves using the patient’s own stem cells( no embryos involved ). That is what he meant by not using cloning techniques but the end result is the same. A working organ that can be used and transplanted into humans.

I do not know how you could read the entire article and miss the whole point of it, but pick up the word when he said he didnt use “cloning techniques”. An analogy would be in today’s high tech world we would be able to send messages just by emailing. The innovator of email then claims we do not use horses to send messages anymore. And you reading that and saying "look messages cant be send because we cant use horses to send them ".

Get it? I think I have proven my point.

[tgan3]

No response?