Enhancing Stem Cell Production for Miraculous Bone Healing in Less than Half the Time

The drug teriparatide, or Forteo, which was approved by the FDA in 2002 for the treatment of osteoporosis appear to also boost bone stem cell production for “miraculous bone healing”.

Astute observations led a team of clinicians and researchers to uncover how this drug can also boost our bodies’ bone stem cell production to the point that adults’ bones appear to have the ability to heal at a rate typically seen when they were young kids.

“The decreased healing time is significant, especially when fractures are in hard-to-heal areas like the pelvis and the spine, where you can’t easily immobilize the bone – and stop the pain,” Bukata added. “Typically, a pelvic fracture will take months to heal, and people are in extreme pain for the first eight to 12 weeks. This [healing] time was more than cut in half; we saw complete pain relief, callus formation, and stability of the fracture in people who had fractures that up to that point had not healed.”

When a fracture occurs, a bone becomes unstable and can move back and forth creating a painful phenomenon known as micromotion. As the bone begins healing it must progress through specific, well-defined stages. First, osteoclasts – cells that can break down bone – clean up any fragments or debris produced during the break. Next, a layer of cartilage – called a callus – forms around the fracture that ultimately calcifies, preventing the bony ends from moving, providing relief from the significant pain brought on by micromotion.

Only after the callus is calcified do the bone forming cells – osteoblasts – begin their work. They replace the cartilage with true bone, and eventually reform the fracture to match the shape and structure of the bone into what it was before the break.

According to Puzas, teriparatide significantly speeds up fracture healing by changing the behavior and number of the cartilage and the bone stem cells involved in the process.

“Teriparatide dramatically stimulates the bone’s stem cells into action,” Puzas said. “As a result, the callus forms quicker and stronger. Osteoblasts form more bone and the micromotion associated with the fracture is more rapidly eliminated. All of this activity explains why people with non-healing fractures can now return to normal function sooner.”

I had patients with severe osteoporosis, in tremendous pain from multiple fractures throughout their spine and pelvis, who I would put on teriparatide,” said Bukata. “When they would come back for their follow-up visits three months later, it was amazing to see not just the significant healing in their fractures, but to realize they were pain-free – a new and welcome experience for many of these patients.”

Bukata began prescribing teriparatide to patients with non-healing fractures, and was amazed at her findings: 93 percent showed significant healing and pain control after being on teriparatide for only eight to 12 weeks. And in the lab, Puzas began to understand how teriparatide stimulates bone stem cells into action.

About The Author

Add comment

E-mail is already registered on the site. Please use the Login form or enter another.

You entered an incorrect username or password

Sorry, you must be logged in to post a comment.


by Newest
by Best by Newest by Oldest

Go to kitegen.com for a wind solution with an EROEI of 375:1 or higher 😉


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_turbine_design#Tower_height" REL="nofollow">Calculations could be produced using wind turbine design principles

Page 15 of this presentation has wind power problems and challenges from 2008

Page 25. Enercon 4.5MW offshore turbine weighs 440 tons (looks like mostly steel) Does not look like it includes any support structures


Experts consider the completion of four or five offshore wind farms by 2011 with a total capacity of around 1500 MW as realistic. Such a massive undertaking will require investments in the range of around €3.6 billion throughout Germany, which translates in terms of job creation volume into 25,000 and 40,000 ‘man years’. [so US$5B and 30,000 man years, for 1.5GW -reduce by capacity factor for projects running 2007-2011]

Mathis argued that future 5-7 MW offshore wind turbines erected in 25-40 metre deep water will require new foundation solutions. If such huge foundations were constructed as steel monopiles, the required diameter would be in the range of 8-10 metres and the total length about 50-60 metres. Utilization of jacket type or tripod type foundations with similar capacity and water depth range will, in his view, result into even higher demands with regard to fabrication, welding complexity and corrosion protection. This points to concrete foundations as the solution. However, the construction of gravity-based concrete foundations requires sophisticated formwork systems and new transport logistics methods to deal with component masses between 3000 and 7000 metric tonnes.

The REpower 5M turbine features a rotor diameter of 126 metres and a Top Head Mass (THM; nacelle + rotor) of 430 tonnes [not including tower, foundation and support structures.]

Three substructures were considered for the final selection process:

centre column tripod (CCT);
flat faced tripod (FFT);
OWEC jacket quatropod (OJQ), a four-legged jacket solution.

According to the study a CCT design requires cast nodes to improve fatigue performance, bringing the total mass up to 1080. The FFT needs three large 96-inch (243 cm) diameter piles but no cast components, while the substructure mass is 1140 tonnes. Finally the OJQ is based on a design from OWEC Tower A/S, a ‘traditional’ jacket structure adapted for REpower 5M wind turbine use. The mass of the lightweight structure, including three 72-inch piles for fixing the substructure to the seabed, is approximately 600 tonnes.(For more general information on the Beatrice project see Renewable Energy World November-December 2006)

So 600-1140 tons plus 450 tons for the nacelle and rotors for a 5MW wind turbine (1.5 MW of equivalent nuclear power). 700-1000 tons per MW (nuclear equivalent). for offshore. Land based could be less but there are size limitations on land and tower must be built higher to get same wind quality.

http://www.enercon.de/www/en/nachrichten.nsf/41657424de23a0b8c1256ed10041a39f/6230d2639aa384d9c125736e004679c2?OpenDocument" REL="nofollow">Enercon 6MW model has 36 concrete section

Previously, in-situ concrete (125 m hub height) or steel towers (97 m hub height) were used for the E-112/6 MW. The towers for the E-126/6 MW will be 131 meters tall and made up of 36 concrete segments manufactured at WEC Turmbau Emden GmbH. Once completed, the hub height will reach 135 metres and the overall height an impressive 198 metres.

http://www.perihq.com/documents/WindTurbine-MaterialsandManufacturing_FactSheet.pdf" REL="nofollow">This 2001 8 pager has a table with percentage of materials for different components of wind turbines

2007 article on 3MW turbines

Though wind turbines don't consume fuel, it takes at least 150,000 lb of steel, concrete, and fiberglass to build a single 3-MW turbine. Thus, turbines have a carbon footprint that is laid down before they ever generate a single kilowatt. And detractors point out that steel and concrete are both energy intensive, carbon-emitting industries. There are also networks of roads needed to service wind farms. And wind turbines take land, somewhere between 60 and 300 acres/MW. (For comparison, nuclear and coal plants generate about 1,000 MW/acre).

2007 8 page articles on the wind power supply chain issues

Page 6,7 shows a diagram of the major component assemblies (8000 parts)


20-25% of offshore wind is the support structures

2006: 37 Nordex N62 wind turbines (6340 tons)
NORDEX N 62 69 m hub height 1.3 MW rated power

a CSP tower structure


Although P:eterson's information is useful, some of it is out of date. We need better information on recent wind materials input. In addition, we have next to no information about the materials requirements for solar both PV, and ST. It would also be helpful to have information about copper input requirements. Finally, labor input information would also be helpful. For example, Construction of AP=1000 Reactors reportedly requires between 16 and 20 million hours of labor. I have not been able to find any comparative numbers for wind or solar.