Comments on two previous posts
Lee Buckler has pointed out on my business round-up that the merger between reagents-and-animal-cells company Stem Cell Sciences in the UK and the cell therapy company StemCells in California creates a single company with near-term, medium-term and long-term sources of revenue. That makes sense to me, even though the differences in technologies and the geography seem hard to manage. Also, he just posted a very comprehensive round-up himself. You can see them here.
William Gunn has just commented on my clinical trial analysis post that it’s not just bone-marrow transplant that might call themselves stem cell tranplants but consist of poorly purified and characterized cells. Neural cell transplants can go the same way. Good point. The most salient example I can think of was the tumours that grew in a young patient’s brain and spinal cord after an unregulated procedure (See our Commentary by Clive Svendsen and my news story ). But, like Gunn points, out, it is also a worry for clinical trials.
Thanks both for your insights.
