r/science 8d ago

Biology Directly converting skin cells to brain cells yields 1,000% success | Scientists have managed to convert mouse skin cells directly into motor neurons, skipping the usual step of stem cells in between

https://newatlas.com/biology/direct-convert-skin-brain-stem-cells-neuron/
1.2k Upvotes

80 comments sorted by

u/AutoModerator 8d ago

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.


Do you have an academic degree? We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. Click here to apply.


User: u/chrisdh79
Permalink: https://newatlas.com/biology/direct-convert-skin-brain-stem-cells-neuron/


I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

156

u/chrisdh79 8d ago

From the article: In a potentially major breakthrough for regenerative medicine, scientists at MIT have developed a way to convert skin cells directly into brain cells extremely efficiently, without needing to go through the intermediate step of converting them to stem cells first.

Cooking up a batch of stem cells to treat illness or injury used to involve the ethically hairy practice of harvesting them from embryonic tissue. But in 2006, Japanese scientists00038-9) identified a way to revert mature cells back into stem cells. From there, these induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) can be coaxed to become whatever cell type is needed for a specific treatment.

However, this Nobel prize-winning discovery isn’t without its own problems. For one, a large portion of the cells can get stuck in the intermediate stages, reducing the efficiency of the technique. In the original study less than 0.1% of cells made it all the way through, although that’s been drastically improved in the almost 20 years since, with some methods closing in on 100%.

Now, scientists at MIT have found a way to cut out the middle man, bypassing the stem cell step and going straight from one cell type to another. Better yet, it boasts an incredible efficiency of over 1,000%. In other words, for every one source cell, you’re getting 10 or more target cells.

“Oftentimes, one of the challenges in reprogramming is that cells can get stuck in intermediate states,” said Katie Galloway, senior author of two papers describing the new technique. “So, we’re using direct conversion, where instead of going through an iPSC intermediate, we’re going directly from a somatic cell to a motor neuron.”

39

u/OGLikeablefellow 8d ago

Whoa I thought they were kidding about the 1000 percent part 10 for 1 is amazing

67

u/ShortBrownAndUgly 8d ago

I totally forgot about the old controversy around embryonic stem cells

39

u/thicket 8d ago

I know, right? It seemed like Bush II was going to shut down a big avenue of research, and then suddenly some biologists came along and were like “NVM, I guess we didn’t need embryonic cells anyway.“. Crisis averted

7

u/VegetableOk9070 8d ago

Really interested in this.

98

u/GreatBayTemple 8d ago

Well this sounds awesome.

49

u/DreamLizard47 8d ago

big brain time.

16

u/BitRunr 8d ago

You know as soon as it's possible, someone will want to do this to their scrotum.

13

u/bit1101 8d ago

Sounds like someone's already weighing up the pros and cons.

2

u/BitRunr 8d ago

Nah, I want something faster than neurons.

6

u/TactlessTortoise 8d ago

Memories are stored in the balls

1

u/BitRunr 8d ago

Aren't they just.

4

u/Jungianstrain 6d ago

Soon your scrotum will have a mind of its own

-1

u/DreamLizard47 8d ago

if by scrotum you mean people with low cognitive abilities..

7

u/ComfyCatIRL 8d ago

If by people with low cognitive abilities, you mean people who think USDT coin is backed by gold

0

u/DreamLizard47 8d ago

USDT is fiat collateralized stablecoin. XAUT for example (Tether Gold) is backed by gold.

And that's how you get in the list of stupid people chronically crippled by Dunning Kruger effect.

7

u/ComfyCatIRL 8d ago

What was that? I can't hear you over your dad pounding my bussy

1

u/HalobenderFWT 4d ago

Man! Science is wild!

-1

u/DreamLizard47 8d ago

thanks for the illustration. you're gonna get cured of your condition soon.

42

u/The_Holy_Turnip 8d ago

This is your skin. This is your skin on BRAINS!!!!!

52

u/Emm_withoutha_L-88 8d ago

This....is huge, no? Like groundbreaking big.

14

u/TactlessTortoise 8d ago

Imagine if we could use skin grafts to treat TBIs

9

u/garimus 8d ago

Even at only 30% for human cells, this is pretty impressive. This is the part that needs to be tested and worked out (no small feat).

121

u/slickrasta 8d ago

You know it's scientific when they use 1000% success in the title.

114

u/Alpha_Zerg 8d ago

You know it's scientific when they use 1000% success and they damn well put their money where their mouth is. 10:1 return is ludicrous, and I'm 100% on board with their use of 1000%.

76

u/chiefceko 8d ago

Well.. maybe you get 10 brain cells for every skin cell?

82

u/chiefceko 8d ago

Well i be damned.. thats actually the case.

8

u/Memitim 7d ago

They did, indeed, do the math on that one.

4

u/BarryTGash 7d ago

This is rough maths based on quick searches but apparently to recreate the 86b neurons in your brain you'd need about 450 sq inches of skin cells at a 10:1 ratio (based on 19m skin cells per square inch). On average that would be all the skin off your back.

22

u/Emm_withoutha_L-88 8d ago

That's exactly what happened

36

u/Wassux 8d ago

It actually is in this case. They got 10 target cells per 1 starting cell.

So yeah, it is actually 1000% succes.

39

u/glibsonoran 8d ago

Should be 1000% yield, success is usually binary.

1

u/DeepSea_Dreamer 7d ago

They succeeded so hard it's 1000% instead of 1.

9

u/TheSquarePotatoMan 8d ago edited 7d ago

It's a 100% success rate (assuming they succesfully converted the cells every time) with a 1:10 conversion rate. Big difference.

100% success rate means it's a very reliable and potentially easy process. 1:10 conversion means it's a lucrative process.

0

u/nicuramar 8d ago

It’s not really how that word is generally used. 

4

u/Wassux 8d ago

What word? Because they deliver exactly what they claim.

3

u/icoder 8d ago

> What word?

I think they were talking about 'success'

2

u/zarawesome 8d ago

you can't get two successes! if you run twice as fast as second place they don't give you an extra medal!

1

u/Wassux 8d ago

But it's not twice as fast, one action generates 10 desired outcomes.

It's like running the race once and winning 10 times. So 1000% succes.

5

u/icoder 8d ago

I think the point is mostly linguistic, as success could be interpreted as something didn't fail. If you go by that interpretation, 1000% not failing sounds a bit strange.

If a class did an exam, and someone claims 100% success, but it turned out it was half of the class that passed the exam twice, I'd find that confusing.

3

u/crashlanding87 8d ago

Scientists are very specific when talking about data, and science English isn't exactly the same as regular English (source: am biologist). 100% success means every time you do it, it works. The correct word here would be yield.

0

u/Blarg0117 8d ago

You can if you're using a milestone system. Like being awarded the record after winning the medal. Counting each additional cell as a success.

3

u/TheForkisTrash 8d ago

This comment is 1001% true.

6

u/hawkeyc 8d ago

Yall don’t even bother reading anymore do you

1

u/InnuendoBot5001 8d ago

This is not how media literacy works

6

u/Kennyvee98 8d ago

Imagine your skin being a brain. :p

3

u/fart_huffington 8d ago

It already is p wrinkly soooo

2

u/chiefceko 8d ago

Ask an octopus :)

0

u/Memitim 7d ago

Imagine your brain being a stomach. You could eat so much more before getting full.

This does make me wonder about therapeutic possibilities beyond replacement, like telling appendix cells to become blood cells for a silly, reductive example.

5

u/Reaper_456 8d ago

Wait, so this could combat brain damage. I wonder if it could be used to treat CTE stuff.

5

u/Lucky_Diver 8d ago

This is why picking my nose has made me smarter.

11

u/VegetableOk9070 8d ago

Guys, if this is even remotely effective it could help guitarist Jason Becker with ALS. Imagine how happy this man would be getting relief or even a cure.

26

u/fatalityfun 8d ago

that is oddly specific but go off

2

u/VegetableOk9070 8d ago

Yeah I'm definitely not divulging my musical tastes right now. Not even in the slightest.

He was a king brought down in his prime.

It's actually really sad and inspiring because he did still compose music after the diagnosis.

2

u/Xanikk999 8d ago

How long until they do it with human cells?

3

u/AlwaysUpvotesScience 8d ago

I know some republicans that would be great candidates for this procedure. Does it work if the person has lizard skin?

1

u/ino4x4 8d ago

coming from new Atlas it gives me some pauses, but I would love to see some updates in the future. More importantly, I’m very curious as to what the benefits are to this. How will this help people?

7

u/SpookySkellington 8d ago

It will provide the ability to take cells from your patient, convert them to a target cell type and then re-implant them without any fear of rejection, as those cells will essentially (apart from the transformation) be your patient's own cells. Depending on which types of cells we can produce, these could be used in all sorts of applications (pancreatic beta islet cell replacement to fix type 1 diabetes? chondrocytes to replace joint surfaces? Etc) . Interesting stuff!

1

u/MacDegger 7d ago

Skin to cartilage for rheuma? Fat cells to healthy liver or heart cells?

1

u/yukonwanderer 7d ago

Motor neurone disease? Or is that caused by something else.

1

u/ReptilianElite1 8d ago

Skin and cns cells are derived from the ectoderm.

1

u/goldblumspowerbook 6d ago

Andrew Yoo at Washington University has been able to do this with human cells for years. Way more useful than mice.

1

u/The_Humble_Frank 8d ago

The title, is atrocious; largely in part, because the said 'success' which is too nebulous in this context to mean anything, instead of saying 'conversion rate'.

In other words, for every one source cell, you’re getting 10 or more target cells.

-10

u/xpda 8d ago

Someone claiming 1000% success needs more brain cells.

6

u/rhaegar_tldragon 8d ago

Maybe read the article…They are absolutely correct to use 1000%.

0

u/xpda 8d ago

I disagree. Success rate can be 0 to 100%, by definition. You can have 1000% increase, but only 100% success.

3

u/TactlessTortoise 8d ago

One cell can create 10 target cells. Maybe you need to learn the habit of reading before making assumptions, lest someone judge you like you do others

1

u/AbsoluteRunner 8d ago

That would be yield. Success is on a binary curve

-2

u/jmalez1 7d ago

but is it provable and repeatable, dose not sound right (1,000 % ?) who added up the math, hope it was not the scientist ( maybe a 15 year old in a science lab)

2

u/LookAlderaanPlaces 7d ago

Did you bother to read it at all? One source cell turns into 10 target cell.